[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 19879-19987]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. MACK (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Grams, Mr. Wellstone, 
        and Mr. Grassley):
  S. 1499. A bill to title XVIII of the Social Security Act to promote 
the coverage of frail elderly Medicare beneficiaries permanently 
residing in nursing facilities in specialized health insurance programs 
for the frail elderly; to the Committee on Finance.


 Medicare's Elderly Receiving Innovative Treatments (MERIT) Act of 1999

  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join my colleagues, 
Senator Mikulski, Senator Wellstone, and Senator Grams, in sponsoring 
the Medicare's Elderly Receiving Innovative Treatments (MERIT) Act of 
1999.
  This legislation ensures that frail elderly persons residing in 
nursing homes continue to have the opportunity for improved quality of 
care and better health outcomes provided by the EverCare program. This 
program is reimbursed by Medicare on a capitated fee basis to managed 
care organizations that deliver preventive and primary medical care 
geared to the special needs of this population. Care is given by nurse 
practitioner/physician primary care teams which also coordinate care 
when the patient is hospitalized. Ideally, as much care as possible is 
provided at the nursing home thus preventing the expense of 
hospitalization. A major goal is to maintain stability in the patients' 
life by caring for them in their place of residence. The typical 
patient is over 85, 82 percent are female, 75 percent are on Medicaid 
and 70 percent have dementia.
  The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) requires the Health Care 
Financing Administration (HCFA) to establish a new risk-adjusted 
methodology for payments to health plans which is to go into effect on 
January 1, 2000. An interim risk adjusted payment will be based on 
inpatient hospital encounter data. However, an unintended consequence 
of this methodology may be a dramatic drop in EverCare payments by more 
than 40 percent, according to Long Term Care Data Institute study. This 
would jeopardize the program, which is currently comprised of 
demonstration and non-demonstration components, since providers could 
not afford to remain in business. HCFA recognized the possibly of this 
and did grant an exemption from the interim methodology for one year, 
2000-2001. HCFA, however, has not yet presented a methodology that 
would be fair and adequate to ensure the continuance of EverCare.
  This legislation exempts programs serving the frail elderly living in 
nursing homes from the phased in risk-adjustment payment methodology 
and continues payments using the current system. It directs HCFA to 
develop a distinct payment methodology which meets the needs of these 
patients and to establish performance measurement standards. It also 
allows the frail elderly to join EverCare on a continual basis without 
regard to enrollment periods.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the legislation 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1499

       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 ``Medicare's Elderly Receiving 
     Innovative Treatments (MERIT) Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF PAYMENT RULES.

       Section 1853 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     23) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``subsections (e) and 
     (f)'' and inserting ``subsections (e) through (i)'';
       (B) in paragraph (3)(D), by inserting ``and paragraph (4)'' 
     after ``section 1859(e)(4)''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Exemption from risk-adjustment system for frail 
     elderly beneficiaries enrolled in specialized programs for 
     the frail elderly.--
       ``(A) In general.--During the period described in 
     subparagraph (B), the risk-adjustment described in paragraph 
     (3) shall not apply to a frail elderly Medicare+Choice 
     beneficiary (as defined in subsection (i)(3)) who is enrolled 
     in a Medicare+Choice plan under a specialized program for the 
     frail elderly (as defined in subsection (i)(2)).
       ``(B) Period of application.--The period described in this 
     subparagraph begins with January 2000, and ends with the 
     first month for which the Secretary certifies to Congress 
     that a comprehensive risk adjustment methodology under 
     paragraph (3)(C) (that takes into account the types of 
     factors described in subsection (i)(1)) is being fully 
     implemented.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Special Rules for Frail Elderly Enrolled in 
     Specialized Programs for the Frail Elderly.--
       ``(1) Development and implementation of new payment 
     system.--The Secretary shall develop and implement (as soon 
     as possible after the date of enactment of this subsection), 
     during the period described in subsection (a)(4)(B), a 
     payment methodology for frail elderly Medicare+Choice 
     beneficiaries enrolled in a Medicare+Choice plan under a 
     specialized program for the frail elderly (as defined in 
     paragraph (2)(A)). Such methodology shall account for the 
     prevalence, mix, and severity of chronic conditions among 
     such beneficiaries and shall include medical diagnostic 
     factors from all provider settings (including hospital and 
     nursing facility settings). It shall include functional 
     indicators of health status and such other factors as may be 
     necessary to achieve appropriate payments for plans serving 
     such beneficiaries.
       ``(2) Specialized program for the frail elderly 
     described.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of this part, the term 
     `specialized program for the frail elderly' means a program 
     which the Secretary determines--
       ``(i) is offered under this part as a distinct part of a 
     Medicare+Choice plan;
       ``(ii) primarily enrolls frail elderly Medicare+Choice 
     beneficiaries; and
       ``(iii) has a clinical delivery system that is specifically 
     designed to serve the special needs of such beneficiaries and 
     to coordinate short-term and long-term care for such 
     beneficiaries through the use of a team described in 
     subparagraph (B) and through the provision of primary care 
     services to such beneficiaries by means of such a team at the 
     nursing facility involved.
       ``(B) Specialized team.--A team described in this 
     subparagraph--
       ``(i) includes--

       ``(I) a physician; and
       ``(II) a nurse practitioner or geriatric care manager, or 
     both; and

       ``(ii) has as members individuals who have special training 
     and specialize in the care and management of the frail 
     elderly beneficiaries.
       ``(3) Frail elderly medicare+choice beneficiary 
     described.--For purposes of this part, the term `frail 
     elderly Medicare+Choice beneficiary' means a Medicare+Choice 
     eligible individual who--
       ``(A) is residing in a skilled nursing facility or a 
     nursing facility (as defined for purposes of title XIX) for 
     an indefinite period and without any intention of residing 
     outside the facility; and
       ``(B) has a severity of condition that makes the individual 
     frail (as determined under guidelines approved by the 
     Secretary).''.

     SEC. 3. CONTINUOUS OPEN ENROLLMENT FOR QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1851(e) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395w-21(e)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(7) Special rules for frail elderly medicare+choice 
     beneficiaries enrolling in specialized programs for the frail 
     elderly.--There shall be a continuous open enrollment period 
     for any frail elderly Medicare+Choice beneficiary (as defined 
     in section 1853(i)(3)) who is seeking to enroll in a 
     Medicare+Choice plan under a specialized program for the 
     frail elderly (as defined in section 1853(i)(2)).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Open enrollment periods.--Section 1851(e)(6) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-21(e)(6)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and

[[Page 19880]]

       (C) by inserting at the end of subparagraph (A) the 
     following:
       ``(B) that is offering a specialized program for the frail 
     elderly (as defined in section 1853(i)(2)), shall accept 
     elections at any time for purposes of enrolling frail elderly 
     Medicare+Choice beneficiaries (as defined in section 
     1853(i)(3)) in such program; and''.
       (2) Effectiveness of elections.--Section 1851(f)(4) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-21(f)(4)) is amended by 
     striking ``subsection (e)(4)'' and inserting ``paragraph (4) 
     or (7) of subsection (e)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 4. DEVELOPMENT OF QUALITY MEASUREMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 1852(e) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395w-22(e)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(5) Quality measurement program for specialized programs 
     for the frail elderly as part of medicare+choice plans.--The 
     Secretary shall develop and implement a program to measure 
     the quality of care provided in specialized programs for the 
     frail elderly (as defined in section 1853(i)(2)) in order to 
     reflect the unique health aspects and needs of frail elderly 
     Medicare+Choice beneficiaries (as defined in section 
     1853(i)(3)). Such quality measurements may include indicators 
     of the prevalence of pressure sores, reduction of iatrogenic 
     disease, use of urinary catheters, use of anti-anxiety 
     medications, use of advance directives, incidence of 
     pneumonia, and incidence of congestive heart failure.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services shall first provide for the implementation of the 
     quality measurement program for specialized programs for the 
     frail elderly under the amendment made by subsection (a) by 
     not later than July 1, 2000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Kerrey, 
        Mr. Inouye, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Cochran, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Burns, 
        Mrs. Boxer, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Robb, 
        Mr. Santorum, and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 1500. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide for an additional payment for services provided to certain 
high-cost individuals under the prospective payment system for skilled 
nursing facility service, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.


  Medicare Beneficiary Access To Quality Nursing Home Care Act of 1999

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today along with the distinguished 
Chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, and other 
colleagues in introducing the ``Medicare Beneficiary Access to Quality 
Nursing Home Care Act of 1999.'' This bill will help ensure that 
Medicare beneficiaries will continue to have access to vitally needed 
nursing home care services.
  When Congress passed the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, the BBA, we 
created a new prospective payment system (PPS) for skilled nursing 
facilities (SNF). While the industry generally supported the SNF PPS, 
there clearly have been some unintended consequences as a result of the 
implementation the new payment system which is now beginning to affect 
patient care.
  We have an obligation to Medicare beneficiaries, and particularly 
those in nursing homes as well as those who need to gain admission to 
nursing homes, to correct this problem. This legislation is designed 
specifically to address the problem with patient access to nursing home 
care.
  The measure we are introducing today is designed to address two 
significant problems that have occurred as a result of the 
implementation of the PPS.
  First, the bill provides additional monies to care for the so-called 
high-acuity SNF patients who require non-therapy ancillary services for 
conditions such as cancer, hip fracture, and stroke.
  Second, with respect to the market basket update, the bill closes the 
gap between the inaccurate inflation market basket estimate and the 
actual cost increases between fiscal years 1995 and 1998.
  It is my understanding that both solutions could be easily 
implemented by HCFA.
  Mr. President, let me focus more specifically on each of the two 
provisions.
  With respect to non-therapy ancillary care, the bill proposes to add-
on additional monies under the federal per diem rate for 15 categories 
of care. We are now finding that high-acuity and medically complex 
patients are being shortchanged because the current case-mix system 
does not accurately measure or account for patients with high medical 
complexities which utilize greater ancillary services.
  HCFA has even acknowledged that they do not have accurate data to 
properly compensate for such non-therapy ancillary care. According to 
HCFA, they believe that more accurate data reflecting the case-mix for 
sicker patients should be available in 2001.
  Unfortunately, we now know that beneficiaries are having difficulty 
receiving non-therapy ancillary care today. For some, waiting 2 years 
for the HCFA data is simply not an option.
  Accordingly, the ``Medicare Beneficiary Access to Quality Nursing 
Home Care Act'' will provide interim relief until HCFA has developed 
more complete and accurate data. The bill provides additional funds for 
15 RUS III categories, or the so-called resource utilization groups.
  These RUGS were chosen because they represent categories of services 
that closely match the diagnoses for high-acuity patients. Such 
additional funds would only be provided for a two-year period, or less, 
until the Secretary of Health and Human Services has corrected the data 
to properly reflect the costs of non-therapy ancillary care.
  It is my understanding that HCFA believes they can implement a new 
case mix methodology within this time frame.
  In response to concerns expressed to me by HCFA over Y2K problems and 
the difficulty of any systems' changes at this point in the PPS 
implementation, my bill provides for a simple, temporary add-on federal 
dollars to the federal per diem component.
  Based on informal comments from HCFA officials, the bill should be 
easy for the agency to implement in time to have an immediate positive 
impact on patient care.
  The second feature in our bill attempts to close the gap between the 
inflation adjuster--the market basket update--and the actual cost 
increases. Recent data are now showing that HCFA's market basket 
increase is well below actual inflation costs for nursing home care.
  When Congress passed the BBA, the year 1995 was chosen as the base 
year for future inflation adjustments because it provided the most 
recent set of complete cost reporting data for PPS implementation.
  HCFA was charged with developing a market basket of nursing home 
goods and services to trend forward to 1998, which was when PPS was 
implemented. Unfortunately, it appears that HCFA has underestimated the 
market basket index by not considering the cost of nursing home 
services. In addition, the statute requires the inflation adjuster to 
be market basket minus one, which only makes the estimate worse.
  Evidence is now available to illustrate that the market basket 
estimate is inadequate to properly compensate for nursing home care.
  In 1996, HCFA's market basket increase was approximately 2.7 percent, 
while data now indicates that the actual cost increase was 
approximately 10.5 percent. Preliminary 1997 cost data reflect similar 
differences between the HCFA market basket index and the actual change 
in costs experienced by nursing facilities.
  My legislation provides easily implemented relief to nursing homes 
which are being short changed by inadequate market basket estimates. 
The bill eliminates the ``minus one'' from the inflation adjuster for 
1996, 1997, and 1998, thereby providing a one-percent increase of the 
index over three years, compounded.
  While there may need to be further modification to the actual market 
basket, this straightforward legislative solution enables HCFA to 
implement this provision immediately. This solution will provide 
meaningful and practical relief to nursing homes so they can continue 
to provide quality care for the more medically complex Medicare 
beneficiaries.
  Mr. President, many nursing homes are on the verge of filing for 
bankruptcy and others may be closing their doors due to various PPS 
implementation problems. As a result, Medicare

[[Page 19881]]

beneficiaries are finding themselves on long waiting lists to be 
admitted to a skilled nursing facility. Others are remaining in 
hospitals for extended stays, while they wait for nursing home 
availability.
  The ``Medicare Beneficiary Access to Quality Nursing Home Care Act'' 
is a common sense solution to address these very real problems. It 
provides two solutions that HCFA can implement today without being 
mired in Year 2000 compliance efforts.
  I would add that I am pleased that the Chairman of the Finance 
Committee, Senator Roth, has indicated his interest in moving a 
bipartisan BBA technical bill following the August recess.
  I have written to Senator Roth asking him to carefully review our 
skilled nursing facility bill as he develops a BBA technical 
corrections bill over the next several weeks. I strongly believe this 
bill serves as a viable option on which to address the PPS problem that 
so many nursing homes are facing today.
  I ask unanimous consent that the complete text of the bill be printed 
in the Record.
  Mr. President, I want to express my thanks to my colleague and good 
friend, Senator Domenici, for his valued help in developing the bill 
with me as well as to the many others Senators who have joined us today 
as cosponsors.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1500

       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 ``Medicare Beneficiary Access 
     to Quality Nursing Home Care Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Beneficiaries under the medicare program under title 
     XVIII of the Social Security Act are experiencing decreased 
     access to skilled nursing facility services due to inadequate 
     reimbursement under the prospective payment system for such 
     services under section 1888(e) of such Act.
       (2) Such inadequate reimbursement may force skilled nursing 
     facilities to file for bankruptcy and close their doors, 
     resulting in reduced access to skilled nursing facility 
     services for medicare beneficiaries.
       (3) The methodology under the prospective payment system 
     for skilled nursing facility services has made it more 
     difficult for medicare beneficiaries to find nursing home 
     care. Some beneficiaries are remaining in hospitals for 
     extended stays due to reduced access to nursing homes. Others 
     are placed in nursing homes that are hours away from family 
     and friends.
       (4) The Health Care Financing Administration has indicated 
     that the prospective payment system for skilled nursing 
     facility services does not accurately account for the costs 
     associated with providing medically complex care (non-therapy 
     ancillary services and supplies). Due to Year 2000 problems, 
     the Health Care Financing Administration claims that it will 
     be unable to properly account for such costs under such 
     system.
       (5) The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) has 
     indicated that payments to skilled nursing facilities under 
     the medicare program may not be adequate for beneficiaries 
     who need relatively high levels of non-therapy ancillary 
     services and supplies. According to MedPAC, such inadequate 
     funding could result in access problems for beneficiaries 
     with medically complex conditions.
       (6) In order to provide adequate payment under the 
     prospective payment system for skilled nursing facility 
     services, such system must take into account the costs 
     associated with providing 1 or more of the following 
     services:
       (A) Ventilator care.
       (B) Tracheostomy care.
       (C) Care for pressure ulcers.
       (D) Care associated with individuals that have experienced 
     a stroke or a hip fracture.
       (E) Care for non-vent, non-trach pneumonia.
       (F) Dialysis.
       (G) Infusion therapy.
       (H) Deep vein thrombosis.
       (I) Care associated with individuals with transient 
     peripheral neuropathy, a chronic obstructive pulmonary 
     disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes, a wound 
     infection, a respiratory infection, sepsis, tuberculosis, 
     HIV, or cancer.
       (7) A temporary legislative solution is necessary in order 
     to ensure that medicare beneficiaries with complex conditions 
     continue to receive access to appropriate skilled nursing 
     facility services.
       (8) The skilled nursing facility market basket increase 
     over the last 3 years evidences a critical payment gap that 
     exists between the actual cost of providing services to 
     medicare beneficiaries residing in a skilled nursing facility 
     and the reimbursement levels for such services under the 
     prospective payment system. In addition, the Health Care 
     Financing Administration, in establishing the skilled nursing 
     facility market basket index under section 1888(e)(5)(A) of 
     the Social Security Act only accounted for the cost of goods, 
     but not for the cost of services, as such section requires.

     SEC. 3. MODIFICATION OF CASE MIX CATEGORIES FOR CERTAIN 
                   CONDITIONS.

       (a) In General.--For purposes of applying any formula under 
     paragraph (1) of section 1888(e) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395yy(e)), for services provided on or after 
     October 1, 1999, and before the earlier of October 1, 2001, 
     or the date described in subsection (c), the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services shall increase the adjusted Federal 
     per diem rate otherwise determined under paragraph (4) of 
     such section for services provided to any individual during 
     the period in which such individual is in a RUGS III category 
     by the applicable payment add-on as determined in accordance 
     with the following table:

RUGS III Category                             Applicable Payment Add-On
  RUC........................................................$73.57....

  RUB........................................................$23.06....

  RUA........................................................$17.04....

  RVC........................................................$76.25....

  RVB........................................................$30.36....

  RVA........................................................$20.93....

  RHC........................................................$54.07....

  RHB........................................................$27.28....

  RHA........................................................$25.07....

  RMC........................................................$69.98....

  RMB........................................................$30.09....

  RMA........................................................$24.24....

  SE3........................................................$98.41....

  SE2........................................................$89.05....

  CA1.......................................................$27.02.....

       (b) Update.--The Secretary shall update the applicable 
     payment add-on under subsection (a) for fiscal year 2001 by 
     the skilled nursing facility market basket percentage change 
     (as defined under section 1888(e)(5)(B) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395yy(e)(5)(B)) applicable to such 
     fiscal year.
       (c) Date Described.--The date described in this subsection 
     is the date that the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     implements a case mix methodology under section 
     1888(e)(4)(G)(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1395yy(e)(4)(G)(i)) that takes into account adjustments for 
     the provision of non-therapy ancillary services and supplies 
     such as drugs and respiratory therapy.

     SEC. 4. MODIFICATION TO THE SNF UPDATE TO FIRST COST 
                   REPORTING PERIOD.

       (a) In General.--Section 1888(e) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395yy(e)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)(B)(i), by striking ``minus 1 
     percentage point''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ``reduced (on an 
     annualized basis) by 1 percentage point''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to services provided on or after October 1, 1999.

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to join with Senator Hatch 
in introducing the ``Medicare Beneficiary Access to Quality Nursing 
Home Care Act of 1999.''
  I am convinced that this bill is urgently needed to assure our senior 
citizens have access to quality nursing home care through the Medicare 
program.
  We can all take a certain amount of pride in the bipartisan Balanced 
Budget Act of 1997, which contained the most sweeping reforms for 
Medicare since the program was enacted in 1965. These reforms have 
extended the solvency of the program to 2015 and brought new health 
coverage options to seniors throughout the country.
  However, it should come as no surprise that legislation as complex as 
the Balanced Budget Act (BBA), as well as its implementation by the 
Health Care Financing Administration, has produced some unintended 
consequences that need to be corrected.
  That is exactly the situation in the case of nursing homes. The 
transition to the Prospective Payment System (PPS) for Skilled Nursing 
Facilities (SNFs) that was contained in the BBA is seriously 
threatening access to needed care for seniors all across the country.
  In May, 63 Senators joined with me in sending a bipartisan appeal to 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services urging her to address the 
growing crisis in the nursing home industry through administrative 
action. To date, we have received no direct response from the Secretary 
on this matter, nor has the Health Care Financing

[[Page 19882]]

Administration (HCFA) shown any willingness to address the problem.
  With time quickly running out on many nursing home operators, I 
believe Congress must act before it is too late to assure our seniors 
will continue to have access to quality nursing home care.
  Let me note that Congress is not alone in believing there is a 
problem here. Dr. Gail Wilensky, the Chair of the Medicare Payment 
Advisory Commission, recently testified before the Senate Finance 
Committee that some Medicare patients are having difficulty accessing 
care in skilled nursing facilities. Dr. Wilensky went on to say that 
the current reimbursement system adopted by HCFA does not adequately 
account for patients requiring high levels of nontherapy ancillary 
services and supplies.
  In New Mexico, there are currently 81 nursing homes in the state 
serving about 6,000 patients, and I am convinced that the current 
Medicare payment system, as implemented by HCFA, simply does not 
provide enough funds to cover the costs being incurred by these 
facilities when they care for our senior citizens.
  For rural states like New Mexico, corrective action is critically 
important. Many communities in my state are served by a single facility 
that is the only provider for many miles. If such a facility were to 
close, patients in that home would be forced to move to facilities much 
farther away from their families. Moreover, nursing homes in smaller, 
rural communities often operate on a razor thin bottom line, and, for 
them, the reductions in Medicare reimbursements have been especially 
devastating.
  The legislation we are introducing today would go a long way toward 
restoring stability in the nursing home industry. It would increase 
reimbursement rates through two provisions.
  First, a 2-year period, the bill modestly increases payments for 15 
high acuity conditions, like cancer, hip fracture, and stroke. At the 
end of 2 years, HCFA expects that they will have the data to more 
properly reflect the high costs of these cases in the payment system.
  Second, the bill eliminates the one percentage point reduction in the 
annual inflation update for all reimbursement rates for skilled nursing 
facilities.
  I look forward to working with Senator Hatch and the other cosponsors 
of this bill in pushing for passage of this critical legislation when 
we return in September.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 1501. A bill to improve motor carrier safety, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


            the motor carrier safety improvement act of 1999

 Mr. McCAIN. I am pleased to introduce the Motor Carrier Safety 
Improvement Act of 1999. This measure is designed to remedy certain 
weaknesses regarding the Federal motor carrier safety program as 
identified by the Department of Transportation's Inspector General (DOT 
IG) in April 1999. The Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act also 
contains several new initiatives intended to advance safety on our 
nation's roads and highways.
  The bill would establish a separate Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration within the DOT. That agency would be responsible for 
carrying out the Federal motor carrier safety enforcement and 
regulatory responsibilities currently held by the Federal Highway 
Administration. It would be headed by an Administrator, appointed by 
the President and confirmed by the Senate.
  To guard against increasing the already bloated Federal bureaucracy, 
the bill would cap employment and funding at the levels currently 
endorsed by the Administration for motor carrier safety activities. 
This legislation also recognizes the significant differences between 
truck operations and passenger carrying operations and accordingly, 
would call for a separate division within the new agency to ensure 
commercial bus safety.
  Aside from organizational issues, the Motor Carrier Safety 
Improvement Act would require the Department to implement all the IG's 
recently issued truck safety recommendations. DOT has indicated it will 
act on some of the recommendations, but it has failed to articulate a 
definitive action plan to implement all of the IG's recommendations. We 
should not risk the consequences of ignoring the IG's recommendations 
and this bill would require action to eliminate the identified safety 
gaps at DOT. In addition, it would authorize additional funding as 
requested by the Administration to address safety shortcomings. It also 
includes a number of items to address truck safety and enforcement, 
including provisions to strengthen the Commercial Drivers License 
Program, to improve data collection activities and to promote the 
accurate exchange of driver information among the states.
  I want to take a moment to share with my colleagues how I reached the 
decision to develop this measure.
  In the last Congress, a comprehensive package of motor carrier and 
highway safety provisions was enacted as part the Transportation Equity 
Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). This package was developed over a 
two-year period. Throughout the 105th Congress, the primary impediment 
faced by the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation when 
crafting our highway safety legislation was an insufficient allocation 
of contract authority from the highway trust fund. Despite this serious 
constraint, the Committee did succeed in raising the authorizations for 
motor carrier and highway safety programs. At the same time, the 
Committee also succeeded in incorporating into TEA-21 almost every 
safety initiative brought to the Committee's attention.
  Several months after TEA-21 was signed into law, I asked the IG to 
assess a proposal to move the then Office of Motor Carriers (OMC) form 
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The proposal was being advanced 
by the Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Transportation who was, and is, concerned about OMC's effectiveness in 
overseeing the safety of our nation's truck and bus industries, 
concerns I share overall.
  The proposal, originally contained in an appropriations bill, was 
eliminated when it was brought to the House Floor. Consequently, I was 
surprised to learn of its resurrection as a line item in early drafts 
of the conference report on the Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal 
year 1999. I remind my colleagues that the transfer had never been 
included in any House or Senate-passed legislation, nor had any of the 
authorizing Committees of jurisdiction ever been asked to consider it 
at all in the 105th Congress.
  Rather than enact measures that have surface appeal, it is the 
responsibility of the Congress to ascertain whether the proposals would 
be effective. I felt it very important that we first determine whether 
NHTSA was the most appropriate entity to oversee truck safety before 
requiring it to take on such critical yet unfamiliar responsibilities. 
That is why I asked for the IG's counsel.
  I chaired a hearing in April at which the IG released his report and 
offered several ways to improve motor carrier safety. The IG's report 
does not endorse transferring the responsibilities to NHTSA. While this 
and several options were discussed, the IG stressed that the greatest 
problem impeding the effectiveness of the Office of Motor Carriers was 
a fundamental lack of leadership as currently structured. I repeat, the 
IG found that leadership was the greatest gap hindering truck safety 
advancements.
  One way to raise the visibility of truck safety and bring leadership 
to motor carrier safety issues is to create an entity that has motor 
carrier safety as its sole purpose. Given that we have agencies 
responsible for air, rail, and highway safety, it seems within reason 
to provide similar treatment in this modal area, particularly given the 
many identified problems stemming from a lack of attention within its 
current structure.

[[Page 19883]]

  Further, creating a direct link with the Office of the Secretary 
would guarantee that motor carrier safety share holders, including 
owners, operators, drivers, safety advocates and even government 
employees, would not be forced to vie for an agency's attention, forced 
to compete against highway construction and other interests as is 
currently the case. As we have regrettably learned, the scales of 
safety and highway construction are not balanced and we need to take 
action to alter this inequity.
  Other legislative proposals have been offered in recent days. I 
assure my colleagues that I am willing to review those measures and 
listen to other suggestions to improve this legislation.
  In the many meetings and hearings that have been held to discuss 
options to enhance highway safety, it became very clear that all motor 
carrier stake holders share a common goal. We want to improve truck and 
bus safety, decrease highway accidents, and reduce accident fatalities. 
I look forward to working with my colleagues, the Administration, 
highway safety groups, safety enforcement officials, and truck and 
motor coach representatives to achieve a realistic and effective safety 
bill. To attempt to do less would be an abrogation of our 
responsibility.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED:
  S. 1502. A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 
require mandatory spending limits for Senate candidates and limits on 
independent expenditures, to ban soft money, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Rules and Administration.


               THE CAMPAIGN SPENDING CONTROL ACT OF 1999

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss legislation I am 
introducing, the Campaign Spending Control Act of 1999. I introduced 
similar legislation in 1997. Unfortunately, in the last two years we 
have only seen the financial excesses of our campaign system grow, 
further disenfranchising and disillusioning voters. If our government 
is to regain the confidence and participation of the electorate, 
enactment of this legislation is more necessary today than it was two 
years ago.
  Mr. President, two independent public policy groups recently released 
surveys gauging the public's opinion of their federal government. The 
news, once again, was not good for our democracy.
  Earlier this month the Council for Excellence in Government released 
a nonpartisan poll, conducted by respected pollsters Peter Hart and 
Robert Teeter, which demonstrated that less than four in ten Americans 
now believe that President Lincoln's refrain, that our government is 
``of, by, and for the people'' is accurate. While past disillusionment 
with government was directed at so-called ``unaccountable 
bureaucrats,'' today most Americans blame the moneyed special interests 
and the politicians and their political parties for the fact that 
government is not accountable to the average citizen. Patricia 
McGinnis, the Council's President, characterized the poll as 
demonstrating that ``we have an anemic democracy, badly in need of 
involvement and ownership by its citizens.''
  Back in January of this year the Center on Policy Attitudes, released 
a nonpartisan poll which showed continued record high public 
dissatisfaction with government. This finding is disconcerting given 
that our nation is experiencing an unprecedented economic boom coupled 
with military security. Nonetheless, the Center's study showed that 
less than one in three Americans ``trust the government in Washington 
to do what is right'' most of the time. The study concludes that 
``[t]he public's dissatisfaction with the US government is largely due 
to the perception that elected officials, acting in their self-
interest, give priority to special interests and partisan agendas, over 
the interests of the public as a whole.'' Specifically, the survey 
found that three in four Americans believe that the government is ``run 
for the benefit of a few big interests.''
  Mr. President, I believe that the biggest culprit fueling the public 
perception that politicians, political parties, and representational 
government is beholden to special interests, not the needs of the 
average citizen, is our campaign financing system. When politicians 
depend upon wealthy special interests, which represent less than one 
percent of the citizenry, for the political contributions that fuel 
campaigns the public is left to conclude that its voice will not, 
cannot, be heard, never mind addressed.
  The 1996 elections produced record spending: over 2.7 billion 
dollars, or approximately 28 dollars per voter. All this money produced 
record-low voter participation. These two tragic facts are inextricably 
linked. Most Americans believe our current campaign system is tainted 
by a flood of special interest money, drowning out their voice, making 
their participation meaningless, and leaving their concerns 
unaddressed.
  Mr. President, unfortunately, the excesses of 1996 were only 
multiplied in 1998. Funded by unregulated, unlimited ``soft money'' 
contributions, the use of unaccountable ``issue ads'' tripled. Without 
the ability to check either the facts or the sponsors of these ads, 
Americans became more cynical and less likely to participate. 
Candidates, on the other hand, are forced to raise money to not only 
match the resources and the advertising, of their opponent, but also 
outside groups that are running ``issue ads.''
  Those challenging sitting Members of Congress are most disadvantaged 
by our financing system: in 1998 almost half of the House of 
Representatives faced opponents with little or no funding. The money 
chase saps a candidate's time, limiting the ability and incentive to 
debate, attend forums, and otherwise engage voters. Even the donors 
dislike the current system: with many corporate leaders announcing 
their opposition to, and unwillingness to participate in, the current 
system. We are trapped in a system that no one, not the voters, not the 
candidates, not the donors, thinks proper.
  The roots of this abysmal situation can be traced to a misguided 
Supreme Court decision. In Buckley v. Valeo, a 1976 case which 
challenged the 1974 campaign reform legislation, the Court held that, 
in order to avoid corruption, or its appearance, political 
contributions could be limited. However, the Court invalidated campaign 
expenditure limits. The Court surmised that, given the contribution 
limit reforms, expenditure limits were not only unnecessary but would 
stifle unlimited and in-depth debate stimulated by greater campaign 
spending. This conjecture has been proven absolutely false by over 
twenty years of practical experience.
  The single most important step to reform elections and revitalize our 
democracy is to reverse the Buckley decision by limiting the amount of 
money that a candidate or his allies can spend.
  For this reason Senator Johnson and I are introducing legislation 
which directly challenges the Buckley decision and places mandatory 
limits on all campaign expenditures. These limits do not favor 
incumbents. Historically, these limits would have restricted almost 
four out of five incumbents, while impacting only a handful of 
challengers. Additionally, this legislation would fully ban corporate 
contributions, as well as unlimited and unregulated contributions by 
wealthy individuals and organizations. Further, our bill would limit 
campaign expenditures by supposedly, neutral, independent groups, and 
restrict corporations, labor unions, and other organizations from 
influencing campaigns under the guise of issue advocacy. The end result 
of this legislation would be to eliminate over a half-billion dollars 
from the system, encourage challenges to incumbents, and further 
promote debate among both candidates and the electorate.
  What effect would these limits have on political debate? Contrary to 
the Supreme Court, I believe such limits would increase dialogue. 
Candidates would be free from the burdens of unending fundraising and 
thus be available to participate in debates, forums, and interviews. 
With greater access to candidates and less reason to believe that 
candidates were captives of their contributors, voters might well be

[[Page 19884]]

more prepared to invest the time needed to be informed on issues of 
concern and ask candidates to address them.
  Some of the most extreme defenders of our current campaign financing 
system will argue that this legislation impinges upon freedom of 
speech. In analyzing this criticism it is important to remember that 
the vast majority of Americans, ninety-six percent, have never made a 
political contribution. The bill will marginally restrict the rights of 
a few to contribute and spend money--not speak--so that the majority of 
voters might restore their faith in the process. Campaign finances will 
be restricted no more than necessary to fulfill several compelling 
interests, the most important of which is the people's faith in their 
government. Such a restriction conforms with Constitutional 
jurisprudence and has been demonstrated as necessary by history. The 
fact is all democratic debates are restricted by rules. My legislation 
would simply reinstall some rules into our political campaigns while 
directly impacting very few Americans.
  Another criticism of this bill will be that it goes too far. Many 
reform proponents argue that we should concentrate on more modest 
gains. It is irrefutable that today, Congress struggles to consider 
even the most modest of reforms, such as banning so called soft money: 
unlimited donations by corporations, labor unions, and wealthy 
individuals to political party committees. Unfortunately the debate in 
Congress has regressed terribly from the original McCain-Feingold bill, 
which addressed runaway campaign expenditures with voluntary spending 
limits. Yet, there are also reasons to be optimistic about 
implementation of substantial campaign reform.
  Reform has broad public support and has grown into a major grass-
roots initiative outside of Washington, DC. Elected officials from 
thirty-three states have urged that the Buckley decision be revisited 
and limits implemented. Legislative bodies in Ohio and Vermont have 
implemented sweeping reform by enacting mandatory caps on candidate 
expenditures. Other states, such as my own, have embraced public 
financing as a more modest, but significant, means of reform. On 
election day in 1998 voters in Arizona and Massachusetts approved 
significant reforms, both of which would ban so called ``soft money'' 
as well as encourage contribution and spending limits through voluntary 
public financing. Currently, campaign finance reform is enacted or 
being pursued in more than forty states. While significant reform may 
be a major step for Congress; our constituents and their state and 
local representatives are implementing important reform throughout the 
nation.
  Unfortunately, because of the overly restrictive and confused 
jurisprudence flowing from the Buckley decision, many of these popular 
initiatives face years of special interest challenge in court. Indeed, 
the most effective reforms will, most likely, be struck down by trial 
courts. While I enthusiastically support any substantive reform, if we 
are to address the underlying cancer which has disintegrated voter 
trust and participation, the problem of unlimited expenditures must be 
directly confronted. As I have already stated, this is a step that one 
municipality and two states have embraced. Many more state officials as 
well as prominent constitutional law scholars have urged such a course. 
Expenditure limitations have been proposed by Congressional reformers 
in the past, and it is time to rededicate ourselves to this goal. The 
largest impediment to such reform is the Supreme Court, and I believe 
that there is, again, reason to be optimistic that the Court will 
accommodate such reform in the near future.
  Currently, the Court has before it a case which challenges the 
Buckley decision. In Buckley, the Court upheld against First Amendment 
challenge the $1,000 federal contribution limit passed by Congress. In 
Shrink Missouri Government PAC v. Adams, the case currently under 
review by the Supreme Court, the Eighth Circuit struck down as 
unconstitutional Missouri's virtually identical state-wide contribution 
limit of $1,075, holding that only proof of corruption can justify 
contribution limits. I have led several members of Congress in an 
amicus brief to the Court.
  Mr. President, our brief makes two arguments. First, it demonstrates 
that the Eighth Circuit's decision is inconsistent with the Supreme 
Court's decision in Buckley and should be reversed on that ground 
alone. Second, it contends that the Court should give legislatures the 
leeway to pass reforms that will respond meaningfully to the erosion of 
public confidence in the government created by the current campaign 
financing system.
  This leeway can be provided in two ways. First, the Court should 
review campaign finance reforms under a deferential standard of 
review--``intermediate'' scrutiny rather than ``strict'' scrutiny--as 
long as the legislature does not justify the reforms on the 
communicative impact of the speech at issue. Second, the Court should 
recognize the institutional competence uniquely possessed by 
legislatures both to identify threats to the integrity of the electoral 
system and to implement corresponding reforms.
  The amicus brief does not advocate any particular type of reform, but 
rather urges the Court to provide leeway for legislatures to enact 
necessary reforms. It is my hope that this case, while not changing the 
fundamental holding of Buckley, will stimulate the Court to provide 
greater deference to legislatures that seek to address the threat that 
campaign financing, and the cynicism it creates, poses to our 
democracy.
  Once such leeway has been provided, the Court will be forced to 
revisit its holding that spending money is the functional equivalent to 
speaking. Experience since this 1976 decision should force the Court to 
realize that while money fuels speech, at some point, financial 
expenditures only increase a speaker's volume. Spending has now reached 
a shrill pitch that the vast majority of Americans want addressed. 
Elected representatives in thirty three states and countless grassroots 
officials agree with this sentiment. The legislation I have introduced 
today will implement such reform, restoring rules to our political 
debate, encouraging public participation, and thus stimulating faith in 
our democracy. I thank Senator Johnson for his support in this 
endeavor.
  Mr. President, I would ask that a copy of this bill be printed in the 
Record.
  The bill follows:

                                S. 1502

       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 ``Campaign 
     Spending Control Act of 1999''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Statement of purpose.
Sec. 3. Findings of fact.

                TITLE I--SENATE ELECTION SPENDING LIMITS

Sec. 101. Senate election spending limits.

           TITLE II--COORDINATED AND INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES

Sec. 201. Adding definition of coordination to definition of 
              contribution.
Sec. 202. Treatment of certain coordinated contributions and 
              expenditures.
Sec. 203. Political party committees.
Sec. 204. Limit on independent expenditures.
Sec. 205. Clarification of definitions relating to independent 
              expenditures.
Sec. 206. Elimination of leadership PACs.

                         TITLE III--SOFT MONEY

Sec. 301. Soft money of political party committee.
Sec. 302. State party grassroots funds.
Sec. 303. Reporting requirements.
Sec. 304. Soft money of persons other than political parties.

                         TITLE IV--ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 401. Filing of reports using computers and facsimile machines.
Sec. 402. Audits.
Sec. 403. Authority to seek injunction.
Sec. 404. Increase in penalty for knowing and willful violations.
Sec. 405. Prohibition of contributions by individuals not qualified to 
              vote.
Sec. 406. Use of candidates' names.
Sec. 407. Expedited procedures.

           TITLE V--SEVERABILITY; REGULATIONS; EFFECTIVE DATE

Sec. 501. Severability.
Sec. 502. Regulations.

[[Page 19885]]

Sec. 503. Effective date.

     SEC. 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       The purposes of this Act are to--
       (1) restore the public confidence in and the integrity of 
     our democratic system;
       (2) strengthen and promote full and free discussion and 
     debate during election campaigns;
       (3) relieve Federal officeholders from limitations on their 
     attention to the affairs of the Federal government that can 
     arise from excessive attention to fundraising;
       (4) relieve elective office-seekers and officeholders from 
     the limitations on purposeful political conduct and discourse 
     that can arise from excessive attention to fundraising;
       (5) reduce corruption and undue influence, or the 
     appearance thereof, in the financing of Federal election 
     campaigns; and
       (6) provide non-preferential terms of access to elected 
     Federal officeholders by all interested members of the public 
     in order to uphold the constitutionally guaranteed right to 
     petition the Government for redress of grievances.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS OF FACT.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The current Federal campaign finance system, with its 
     perceived preferential access to lawmakers for interest 
     groups capable of contributing sizable sums of money to 
     lawmakers' campaigns, has caused a widespread loss of public 
     confidence in the fairness and responsiveness of elective 
     government and undermined the belief, necessary to a 
     functioning democracy, that the Government exists to serve 
     the needs of all people.
       (2) The United States Supreme Court, in Buckley v. Valeo, 
     424 U.S. 1 (1976), disapproved the use of mandatory spending 
     limits as a remedy for such effects, while approving the use 
     of campaign contribution limits.
       (3) Since 1976, campaign expenditures have risen steeply in 
     Federal elections with spending by successful candidates for 
     the United States Senate between 1976 and 1996 rising from 
     $609,100 to $3,775,000, an increase that is twice the rate of 
     inflation.
       (4) As campaign spending has escalated, voter turnout has 
     steadily declined and in 1996 voter turnout fell to its 
     lowest point since 1924, and stands now at the lowest level 
     of any democracy in the world.
       (5) Coupled with out-of-control campaign spending has come 
     the constant necessity of fundraising, arising, to a large 
     extent, from candidates adopting a defensive ``arms race'' 
     posture of constant readiness against the risk of massively 
     financed attacks against whatever the opposing candidate may 
     say or do.
       (6) The current campaign finance system has had a 
     deleterious effect on those who hold public office as endless 
     fundraising pressures intrude upon the performance of 
     constitutionally required duties. Capable and dedicated 
     officials have left office in dismay over these distractions 
     and the negative public perceptions that the fundraising 
     process engenders and numerous qualified citizens have 
     declined to seek office because of the prospect of having to 
     raise the extraordinary amounts of money needed in today's 
     elections.
       (7) The requirement for candidates to raise funds, the 
     average 1996 expenditure level required a successful Senate 
     candidate to raise more than $12,099 a week for 6 years, 
     significantly impedes on the ability of Senators and other 
     officeholders to tend to their official duties, and limits 
     the ability of candidates to interact with the electorate 
     while also tending to professional responsibilities.
       (8) As talented incumbent and potential public servants are 
     deterred from seeking office in Congress because of such 
     fundraising pressures, the quality of representation suffers 
     and those who do serve are impeded in their effort to devote 
     full attention to matters of the Government by the campaign 
     financing system.
       (9) Contribution limits are inadequate to control all of 
     these trends and as long as campaign spending is effectively 
     unrestrained, supporters can find ways to protect their 
     favored candidates from being outspent. Since 1976, major 
     techniques have been found and exploited to get around and 
     evade contribution limits.
       (10) Techniques to evade contribution limits include 
     personal spending by wealthy candidates, independent 
     expenditures that assist or attack an identified candidate, 
     media campaigns by corporations, labor unions, and nonprofit 
     organizations to advocate the election or defeat of 
     candidates, and the use of national, State, or local 
     political parties as a conduit for money that assists or 
     attacks such candidates.
       (11) Wealthy candidates may, under the present Federal 
     campaign financing system, spend any amount they want out of 
     their own resources and while such spending may not be self-
     corrupting, it introduces the very defects the Supreme Court 
     wanted to avoid. The effectively limitless character of such 
     resources obliges a wealthy candidate's opponent to reach for 
     larger amounts of outside support, causing the deleterious 
     effects previously described.
       (12) Experience shows that there is an identity of interest 
     between candidates and political parties because the parties 
     exist to support candidates, not the other way around. Party 
     expenditures in support of, or in opposition to, an 
     identifiable candidate are, therefore, effectively spending 
     on behalf of a candidate.
       (13) Political experience shows that so-called 
     ``independent'' support, whether by individuals, committees, 
     or other entities, can be and often is coordinated with a 
     candidate's campaign by means of tacit understandings without 
     losing its nominally independent character and, similarly, 
     contributions to a political party, ostensibly for ``party-
     building'' purposes, can be and often are routed, by 
     undeclared design, to the support of identified candidates.
       (14) The actual, case-by-case detection of coordination 
     between candidate, party, and independent contributor is, as 
     a practical matter, impossible in a fast-moving campaign 
     environment.
       (15) So-called ``issue advocacy'' communications, by or 
     through political parties or independent contributors, need 
     not advocate expressly for the election or defeat of a named 
     candidate in order to cross the line into election campaign 
     advocacy; any clear, objective indication of purpose, such 
     that voters may readily observe where their electoral support 
     is invited, can suffice as evidence of intent to impact a 
     Federal election campaign.
       (16) When State political parties or other entities 
     operating under State law receive funds, often called ``soft 
     money'', for use in Federal elections, they become de facto 
     agents of the national political party and the inclusion of 
     these funds under applicable Federal limitations is necessary 
     and proper for the effective regulation of Federal election 
     campaigns.
       (17) The exorbitant level of money in the political system 
     has served to distort our democracy by giving some 
     contributors, who constitute less than 3 percent of the 
     citizenry, the appearance of favored access to elected 
     officials, thus undermining the ability of ordinary citizens 
     to petition their Government. Concerns over the potential for 
     corruption and undue influence, and the appearances thereof, 
     has left citizens cynical, the reputation of elected 
     officials tarnished, and the moral authority of Government 
     weakened.
       (18) The 2 decades of experience since the ruling of the 
     Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo in 1976 have made it 
     evident that reasonable limits on election campaign 
     expenditures are now necessary and these limits must 
     comprehensively address all types of expenditures to prevent 
     circumvention of such limits.
       (19) The Supreme Court based its Buckley v. Valeo decision 
     on a concern that spending limits could narrow political 
     speech ``by restricting the number of issues discussed, the 
     depth of their exploration, and the size of the audience 
     reached''. The experience of the past 20 years has been 
     otherwise as experience shows that unlimited expenditures can 
     drown out or distort political discourse in a flood of 
     distractive repetition. Reasonable spending limits will 
     increase the opportunity for previously muted voices to be 
     heard and thereby increase the number, depth, and diversity 
     of ideas presented to the public.
       (20) Issue advocacy communications that do not promote or 
     oppose an identified candidate should remain unregulated, as 
     should the traditional freedom of the press to report and 
     editorialize about candidates and campaigns.
       (21) In establishing reasonable limits on campaign 
     spending, it is necessary that the limits reflect the 
     realities of modern campaigning in a large, diverse 
     population with sophisticated and expensive modes of 
     communication. The limits must allow citizens to benefit from 
     a full and free debate of issues and permit candidates to 
     garner the resources necessary to engage in that debate.
       (22) The expenditure limits established in this Act for 
     election to the United States Senate were determined after 
     careful review of historical spending patterns in Senate 
     campaigns as well as the particular spending level of the 3 
     most recent elections as evidenced by the following:
       (A) The limit formula allows a candidate a level of 
     spending which guarantees an ability to disseminate the 
     candidate's message by accounting for the size of the 
     population in each State as well as historical spending 
     trends including the demonstrated trend of lower campaign 
     spending per voter in larger States as compared to voter 
     spending in smaller States.
       (B) The candidate expenditure limits included in this 
     legislation would have restricted 80 percent of the incumbent 
     candidates in the last 3 elections, while only impeding 18 
     percent of the challengers.
       (C) It is clear from recent experience that expenditure 
     limits as set by the formula in this Act will be high enough 
     to allow an effective level of competition, encourage 
     candidate dialogue with constituents, and circumscribe the 
     most egregiously high spending levels, so as to be a bulwark 
     against future campaign finance excesses and the resulting 
     voter disenfranchisement.
                TITLE I--SENATE ELECTION SPENDING LIMITS

     SEC. 101. SENATE ELECTION SPENDING LIMITS.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431

[[Page 19886]]

     et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 324. SPENDING LIMITS FOR SENATE ELECTION CAMPAIGNS

       ``(a) In General.--The amount of funds expended by a 
     candidate for election, or nomination for election, to the 
     Senate and the candidate's authorized committee with respect 
     to an election shall not exceed the election expenditure 
     limits described in subsections (b), (c), and (d).
       ``(b) Primary Election Expenditure Limit.--The aggregate 
     amount of expenditures made in connection with a primary 
     election by a Senate candidate and the candidate's authorized 
     committee shall not exceed 67 percent of the general election 
     expenditure limit under subsection (d).
       ``(c) Runoff Election Expenditure Limit.--The aggregate 
     amount of expenditures made in connection with a runoff 
     election by a Senate candidate and the candidate's authorized 
     committee shall not exceed 20 percent of the general election 
     expenditure limit under subsection (d).
       ``(d) General Election Expenditure Limit.--
       ``(1) In general.--The aggregate amount of expenditures 
     made in connection with a general election by a Senate 
     candidate and the candidate's authorized committee shall not 
     exceed the greater of--
       ``(A) $1,182,500; or
       ``(B) $500,000; plus
       ``(i) 37.5 cents multiplied by the voting age population 
     not in excess of 4,000,000; and
       ``(ii) 31.25 cents multiplied by the voting age population 
     in excess of 4,000,000.
       ``(2) Exception.--In the case of a Senate candidate in a 
     State that has not more than 1 transmitter for a commercial 
     Very High Frequency (VHF) television station licensed to 
     operate in that State, paragraph (1)(B) shall be applied by 
     substituting--
       ``(A) `$1.00' for `37.5 cents' in clause (i); and
       ``(B) `87.5 cents' for `31.25 cents' in clause (ii).
       ``(3) Indexing.--The monetary amounts in paragraphs (1) and 
     (2) shall be increased as of the beginning of each calendar 
     year based on the increase in the price index determined 
     under section 315(c), except that the base period shall be 
     calendar year 1999.
       ``(e) Exempted Expenditures.--In determining the amount of 
     funds expended for purposes of this section, there shall be 
     excluded any amounts expended for--
       ``(1) Federal, State, or local taxes with respect to 
     earnings on contributions raised;
       ``(2) legal and accounting services provided solely in 
     connection with complying with the requirements of this Act;
       ``(3) legal services related to a recount of the results of 
     a Federal election or an election contest concerning a 
     Federal election; or
       ``(4) payments made to or on behalf of an employee of a 
     candidate's authorized committee for employee benefits--
       ``(A) including--
       ``(i) health care insurance;
       ``(ii) retirement plans; and
       ``(iii) unemployment insurance; but
       ``(B) not including salary, any form of compensation, or 
     amounts intended to reimburse the employee.''.
           TITLE II--COORDINATED AND INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES

     SEC. 201. ADDING DEFINITION OF COORDINATION TO DEFINITION OF 
                   CONTRIBUTION.

       (a) Definition of Contribution.--Section 301(8) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) in clause (ii) by striking the period and inserting ``; 
     or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) a payment made for a communication or anything of 
     value that is for the purpose of influencing an election for 
     Federal office and that is a payment made in coordination 
     with a candidate.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Payment made in coordination with.--The term `payment 
     made in coordination with' means--
       ``(i) a payment made by any person in cooperation, 
     consultation, or concert with, at the request or suggestion 
     of, or pursuant to any general or particular understanding 
     with, a candidate, a candidate's authorized committee, an 
     agent acting on behalf of a candidate or a candidate's 
     authorized committee, or (for purposes of paragraphs (9) and 
     (10) of section 315(a)) another person;
       ``(ii) the financing by any person of the dissemination, 
     distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of any 
     broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form of campaign 
     materials prepared by the candidate or the candidate's 
     authorized committee (not including a communication described 
     in paragraph (9)(B)(i) or a communication that expressly 
     advocates the candidate's defeat); or
       ``(iii) payments made based on information about the 
     candidate's plans, projects, or needs provided to the person 
     making the payment by the candidate, the candidate's 
     authorized committee, or an agent of a candidate or a 
     candidate's authorized committee.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 315.--Section 315(a)(7)(B) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(7)(B)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) expenditures made in coordination with a candidate 
     (within the meaning of section 301(8)(C)) shall be considered 
     to be contributions to the candidate and, in the case of 
     limitations on expenditures, shall be treated as an 
     expenditure for purposes of this section; and''.
       (2) Section 316.--Section 316(b)(2) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441b(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``shall include'' and inserting ``shall have the 
     meaning given those terms in paragraphs (8) and (9) of 
     section 301 and shall also include''.

     SEC. 202. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN COORDINATED CONTRIBUTIONS AND 
                   EXPENDITURES.

       Section 315(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(9) For purposes of this section, contributions made by 
     more than 1 person in coordination with each other (within 
     the meaning of section 301(8)(C)) shall be considered to have 
     been made by a single person.
       ``(10) For purposes of this section, an independent 
     expenditure made by a person in coordination with (within the 
     meaning of section 301(8)(C)) another person shall be 
     considered to have been made by a single person.''.

     SEC. 203. POLITICAL PARTY COMMITTEES.

       (a) Limit on Coordinated and Independent Expenditures by 
     Political Party Committees.--Section 315(d) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and independent 
     expenditures'' after ``Federal office''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by inserting ``, including expenditures made'' after 
     ``make any expenditure''; and
       (B) by inserting ``and independent expenditures advocating 
     the election or defeat of a candidate,'' after ``such 
     party''.
       (b) Rules Applicable When Limits not in Effect.--For 
     purposes of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.), during any period beginning after the 
     effective date of this Act in which the limitation under 
     section 315(d)(3) (as amended by subsection (a)) is not in 
     effect the following amendments shall be effective:
       (1) Independent versus coordinated expenditures by a 
     political party committee.--Section 315(d) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``(2) and (3) of this subsection'' and 
     inserting ``(2), (3), and (4) of this subsection''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``coordinated'' after ``make'';
       (B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``coordinated'' after 
     ``make any''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Prohibition against making both coordinated 
     expenditures and independent expenditures.--
       ``(A) In general.--A committee of a political party shall 
     not make both a coordinated expenditure in excess of $5,000 
     and an independent expenditure with respect to the same 
     candidate during an election cycle.
       ``(B) Certification.--Before making a coordinated 
     expenditure in excess of $5,000 in connection with a general 
     election campaign of a candidate, a committee of a political 
     party that is subject to this subsection shall file with the 
     Commission a certification, signed by the treasurer, stating 
     that the committee will not make independent expenditures 
     with respect to such candidate.
       ``(C) Transfers.--A party committee that certifies under 
     this paragraph that the committee will make coordinated 
     expenditures with respect to any candidate shall not, in the 
     same election cycle, make a transfer of funds to, or receive 
     a transfer of funds from, any other party committee unless 
     that committee has certified under this paragraph that it 
     will only make coordinated expenditures with respect to 
     candidates.
       ``(D) Definition of coordinated expenditure.--In this 
     paragraph, the term `coordinated expenditure' shall have the 
     meaning given the term `payments made in coordination with' 
     in section 301(8)(C).''.
       (2) Limit on contributions to political party committees.--
     Section 315(a) of Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 441a(a)) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``which, in the 
     aggregate, exceed $20,000'' and inserting ``that--
       ``(i) in the case of a political committee that certifies 
     under subsection (d)(4) that it will not make independent 
     expenditures in connection with the general election campaign 
     of any candidate, in the aggregate, exceed $20,000; or
       ``(ii) in the case of a political committee not described 
     in clause (i), in the aggregate, exceed $5,000''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``which, in the 
     aggregate, exceed $15,000'' and inserting ``that--
       ``(i) in the case of a political committee that certifies 
     under subsection (d)(4) that it will not make independent 
     expenditures in connection with the general election campaign 
     of any candidate, in the aggregate, exceed $15,000; or

[[Page 19887]]

       ``(ii) in the case of a political committee not described 
     in clause (i), in the aggregate, exceed $5,000''.
       (c) Definition of Election Cycle.--Section 301 of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(20) Election cycle.--The term `election cycle' means--
       ``(A) in the case of a candidate or the authorized 
     committee of a candidate, the period beginning on the day 
     after the date of the most recent general election for the 
     specific office or seat that the candidate is seeking and 
     ending on the date of the next general election for that 
     office or seat; and
       ``(B) in the case of all other persons, the period 
     beginning on the first day following the date of the last 
     general election and ending on the date of the next general 
     election.''.

     SEC. 204. LIMIT ON INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES.

       (a) In general.--Section 315 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(i) Limit on Independent Expenditures.--No person shall 
     make independent expenditures advocating the election or 
     defeat of a candidate during an election cycle in an 
     aggregate amount greater than the limit applicable to the 
     candidate under subsection (d)(3).''.
       (b) Rules Applicable When Rules in Subsection (a) Not in 
     Effect.--For purposes of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971, during any period beginning after the effective date of 
     this Act in which the limit on independent expenditures under 
     section 315(i) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, 
     as added by subsection (a), is not in effect, section 324 of 
     such Act, as added by section 101(a), is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(f) Increase in Expenditure Limit in Response to 
     Independent Expenditures.--
       ``(1) In general.--The applicable election expenditure 
     limit for a candidate shall be increased by the aggregate 
     amount of independent expenditures made in excess of the 
     limit applicable to the candidate under section 315(d)(3)--
       ``(A) on behalf of an opponent of the candidate; or
       ``(B) in opposition to the candidate.
       ``(2) Notification.--
       ``(A) In general.--A candidate shall notify the Commission 
     of an intent to increase an expenditure limit under paragraph 
     (1).
       ``(B) Commission response.--Within 3 business days of 
     receiving a notice under subparagraph (A), the Commission 
     must approve or deny the increase in expenditure limit.
       ``(C) Additional notification.--A candidate who has 
     increased an expenditure limit under paragraph (1) shall 
     notify the Commission of each additional increase in 
     increments of $50,000.''.

     SEC. 205. CLARIFICATION OF DEFINITIONS RELATING TO 
                   INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES.

       (a) Definition of Independent Expenditure.--Section 301 of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431) is 
     amended by striking paragraph (17) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(17) Independent expenditure.--The term `independent 
     expenditure' means an expenditure that--
       (A) contains express advocacy; and
       (B) is made without the participation or cooperation of, or 
     without consultation with, or without coordination with a 
     candidate or a candidate's authorized committee or agent 
     (within the meaning of section 301(8)(C)).''.
       (b) Definition of Express Advocacy.--Section 301 of Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431), as amended by 
     section 202(c), is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(21) Express advocacy.--The term `express advocacy' 
     includes--
       ``(i) a communication that conveys a message that advocates 
     the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate for 
     Federal office by using an expression such as `vote for,' 
     `elect,' `support,' `vote against,' `defeat,' `reject,' 
     `(name of candidate) for Congress,' `vote pro-life,' or `vote 
     pro-choice,' accompanied by a listing or picture of a clearly 
     identified candidate described as `pro-life' or `pro-choice,' 
     `reject the incumbent,' or an expression susceptible to no 
     other reasonable interpretation but an unmistakable and 
     unambiguous exhortation to vote for or against a specific 
     candidate; or
       ``(ii) a communication that is made through a broadcast 
     medium, newspaper, magazine, billboard, direct mail, or 
     similar type of general public communication or political 
     advertising--
       ``(A) that is made on or after a date that is 90 days 
     before the date of a general election of the candidate;
       ``(B) that refers to the character, qualifications, or 
     accomplishments of a clearly identified candidate, group of 
     candidates, or candidate of a clearly identified political 
     party; and
       ``(C) that does not have as its sole purpose an attempt to 
     urge action on legislation that has been introduced in or is 
     being considered by a legislature that is in session.''.

     SEC. 206. ELIMINATION OF LEADERSHIP PACS.

       (a) Designation and Establishment of Authorized 
     Committee.--Section 302(e) of the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 432(e)) is amended by--
       (1) striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) No political committee that supports, or has 
     supported, more than one candidate may be designated as an 
     authorized committee, except that--
       ``(A) a candidate for the office of President nominated by 
     a political party may designate the national committee of 
     such political party as the candidate's principal campaign 
     committee, if that national committee maintains separate 
     books of account with respect to its functions as a principal 
     campaign committee; and
       ``(B) a candidate may designate a political committee 
     established solely for the purpose of joint fundraising by 
     such candidates as an authorized committee.''; and
       (2) adding at the end the following:
       ``(6)(A) A candidate for Federal office or any individual 
     holding Federal office may not directly or indirectly 
     establish, finance, maintain, or control any political 
     committee other than a principal campaign committee of the 
     candidate, designated in accordance with paragraph (3). A 
     candidate for more than one Federal office may designate a 
     separate principal campaign committee for each Federal 
     office. This paragraph shall not preclude a Federal 
     officeholder who is a candidate for State or local office 
     from establishing, financing, maintaining, or controlling a 
     political committee for election of the individual to such 
     State or local office.
       ``(B) A political committee prohibited by subparagraph (A), 
     that is established before the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph, may continue to make contributions for a period 
     that ends on the date that is 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph. At the end of such period the 
     political committee shall disburse all funds by 1 or more of 
     the following means:
       ``(1) Making contributions to an entity described in 
     section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and 
     exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Act that is 
     not established, maintained, financed, or controlled directly 
     or indirectly by any candidate for Federal office or any 
     individual holding Federal office.
       ``(2) Making a contribution to the Treasury.
       ``(3) Making contributions to the national, State, or local 
     committees of a political party.
       ``(4) Making contributions not to exceed $1,000 to 
     candidates for elective office.''.
                         TITLE III--SOFT MONEY

     SEC. 301. SOFT MONEY OF POLITICAL PARTY COMMITTEE.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by section 101(a), is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 325. SOFT MONEY OF PARTY COMMITTEES.

       ``(a) National Committees.--A national committee of a 
     political party (including a national congressional campaign 
     committee of a political party), an entity that is directly 
     or indirectly established, financed, maintained, or 
     controlled by a national committee or its agent, an entity 
     acting on behalf of a national committee, and an officer or 
     agent acting on behalf of any such committee or entity (but 
     not including an entity regulated under subsection (b)) shall 
     not solicit or receive any contributions, donations, or 
     transfers of funds, or spend any funds, that are not subject 
     to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements 
     of this Act.
       ``(b) State, District, and Local Committees.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any amount that is expended or disbursed 
     by a State, district, or local committee of a political party 
     (including an entity that is directly or indirectly 
     established, financed, maintained, or controlled by a State, 
     district, or local committee of a political party and an 
     officer or agent acting on behalf of any such committee or 
     entity) during a calendar year in which a Federal election is 
     held, for any activity that might affect the outcome of a 
     Federal election, including any voter registration or get-
     out-the-vote activity, any generic campaign activity, and any 
     communication that refers to a candidate (regardless of 
     whether a candidate for State or local office is also 
     mentioned or identified) shall be made from funds subject to 
     the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements of 
     this Act.
       ``(2) Activity excluded from paragraph (1).--
       ``(A) In general.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an 
     expenditure or disbursement made by a State, district, or 
     local committee of a political party for--
       ``(i) a contribution to a candidate for State or local 
     office if the contribution is not designated or otherwise 
     earmarked to pay for an activity described in paragraph (1);
       ``(ii) the costs of a State, district, or local political 
     convention;
       ``(iii) the non-Federal share of a State, district, or 
     local party committee's administrative and overhead expenses 
     (but not including the compensation in any month of any 
     individual who spends more than 20 percent of such 
     individual's time on activity during the month that may 
     affect the outcome of a

[[Page 19888]]

     Federal election) except that for purposes of this clause, 
     the non-Federal share of a party committee's administrative 
     and overhead expenses shall be determined by applying the 
     ratio of the non-Federal disbursements to the total Federal 
     expenditures and non-Federal disbursements made by the 
     committee during the previous presidential election year to 
     the committee's administrative and overhead expenses in the 
     election year in question;
       ``(iv) the costs of grassroots campaign materials, 
     including buttons, bumper stickers, and yard signs that name 
     or depict only a candidate for State or local office; and
       ``(v) the cost of any campaign activity conducted solely on 
     behalf of a clearly identified candidate for State or local 
     office, if the candidate activity is not an activity 
     described in paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Fundraising costs.--Any amount spent by a national, 
     State, district, or local committee, by an entity that is 
     established, financed, maintained, or controlled by a State, 
     district, or local committee of a political party, or by an 
     agent or officer of any such committee or entity to raise 
     funds that are used, in whole or in part, to pay the costs of 
     an activity described in paragraph (1) shall be made from 
     funds subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting 
     requirements of this Act.
       ``(c) Tax-Exempt Organizations.--A national, State, 
     district, or local committee of a political party (including 
     a national congressional campaign committee of a political 
     party, an entity that is directly or indirectly established, 
     financed, maintained, or controlled by any such national, 
     State, district, or local committee or its agent, an agent 
     acting on behalf of any such party committee, and an officer 
     or agent acting on behalf of any such party committee or 
     entity), shall not solicit any funds for or make any 
     donations to an organization that is exempt from Federal 
     taxation under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986.
       ``(d) Candidates.--
       ``(1) In general.--A candidate, individual holding Federal 
     office, or agent of a candidate or individual holding Federal 
     office shall not--
       ``(A) solicit, receive, transfer, or spend funds in 
     connection with an election for Federal office unless the 
     funds are subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and 
     reporting requirements of this Act;
       ``(B) solicit, receive, or transfer funds that are to be 
     expended in connection with any election other than a Federal 
     election unless the funds--
       ``(i) are not in excess of the amounts permitted with 
     respect to contributions to candidates and political 
     committees under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 315(a); 
     and
       ``(ii) are not from sources prohibited by this Act from 
     making contributions with respect to an election for Federal 
     office; or
       ``(C) solicit, receive, or transfer any funds on behalf of 
     any person that are not subject to the limitations, 
     prohibitions, and reporting requirements of the Act if the 
     funds are for use in financing any campaign-related activity 
     or any communication that refers to a clearly identified 
     candidate.
       ``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the 
     solicitation or receipt of funds by an individual who is a 
     candidate for a State or local office if the solicitation or 
     receipt of funds is permitted under State law for the 
     individual's State or local campaign committee.''.

     SEC. 302. STATE PARTY GRASSROOTS FUNDS.

       (a) Individual Contributions.--Section 315(a)(1) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
       ``(D) to--
       ``(i) a State Party Grassroots Fund established and 
     maintained by a State committee of a political party in any 
     calendar year which, in the aggregate, exceed $20,000; or
       ``(ii) any other political committee established and 
     maintained by a State committee of a political party in any 
     calendar year which, in the aggregate, exceed $5,000;
     except that the aggregate contributions described in this 
     subparagraph that may be made by a person to the State Party 
     Grassroots Fund and all committees of a State Committee of a 
     political party in any State in any calendar year shall not 
     exceed $20,000.''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 301 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1970 (2 U.S.C. 431), as amended by section 
     205(b), is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(22) Generic campaign activity.--The term `generic 
     campaign activity' means a campaign activity that promotes a 
     political party and does not refer to any particular 
     candidate for a Federal, State, or local office.
       ``(23) State party grassroots fund.--The term `State Party 
     Grassroots Fund' means a separate segregated fund established 
     and maintained by a State committee of a political party 
     solely for purposes of making expenditures and other 
     disbursements described in section 326(d).''.
       (c) State Party Grassroots Funds.--Title III of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as 
     amended by section 301, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 326. STATE PARTY GRASSROOTS FUNDS.

       ``(a) Definition.--In this section, the term `State or 
     local candidate committee' means a committee established, 
     financed, maintained, or controlled by a candidate for other 
     than Federal office.
       ``(b) Transfers.--Notwithstanding section 315(a)(4), no 
     funds may be transferred by a State committee of a political 
     party from its State Party Grassroots Fund to any other State 
     Party Grassroots Fund or to any other political committee, 
     except a transfer may be made to a district or local 
     committee of the same political party in the same State if 
     the district or local committee--
       ``(1) has established a separate segregated fund; and
       ``(2) uses the transferred funds solely for disbursements 
     and expenditures under subsection (d).
       ``(c) Amounts Received by Grassroots Funds From State and 
     Local Candidate Committees.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any amount received by a State Party 
     Grassroots Fund from a State or local candidate committee for 
     expenditures described in subsection (d) that are for the 
     benefit of the candidate for whom such Fund is established 
     shall be treated as meeting the requirements of section 
     325(b)(1) and section 304(e) if--
       ``(A) the amount is derived from funds which meet the 
     requirements of this Act with respect to any limitation or 
     prohibition as to source or dollar amount specified in 
     paragraphs (1)(A) and (2)(A) of section 315(a); and
       ``(B) the State or local candidate committee--
       ``(i) maintains, in the account from which payment is made, 
     records of the sources and amounts of funds for purposes of 
     determining whether those requirements are met; and
       ``(ii) certifies that the requirements were met.
       ``(2) Determination of compliance.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (1)(A), in determining whether the funds 
     transferred meet the requirements of this Act described in 
     such paragraph--
       ``(A) a State or local candidate committee's cash on hand 
     shall be treated as consisting of the funds most recently 
     received by the committee; and
       ``(B) the committee must be able to demonstrate that the 
     cash on hand of such committee contains funds meeting those 
     requirements sufficient to cover the transferred funds.
       ``(3) Reporting.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), any State 
     Party Grassroots Fund that receives a transfer described in 
     paragraph (1) from a State or local candidate committee shall 
     be required to meet the reporting requirements of this Act, 
     and shall submit to the Commission all certifications 
     received, with respect to receipt of the transfer from the 
     candidate committee.
       ``(d) Disbursements and Expenditures.--A State committee of 
     a political party shall only make disbursements and 
     expenditures from the State Party Grassroots Fund of such 
     committee for--
       ``(1) any generic campaign activity;
       ``(2) payments described in clauses (v), (ix), and (xi) of 
     paragraph (8)(B) and clauses (iv), (viii), and (ix) of 
     paragraph (9)(B) of section 301;
       ``(3) subject to the limitations of section 315(d), 
     payments described in clause (xii) of paragraph (8)(B), and 
     clause (ix) of paragraph (9)(B), of section 301 on behalf of 
     candidates other than for President and Vice President;
       ``(4) voter registration; and
       ``(5) development and maintenance of voter files during any 
     even-numbered calendar year.''.

     SEC. 303. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Reporting Requirements.--Section 304 of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Political Committees.--
       ``(1) National and congressional political committees.--The 
     national committee of a political party, any congressional 
     campaign committee of a political party, and any subordinate 
     committee of either, shall report all receipts and 
     disbursements during the reporting period, whether or not in 
     connection with an election for Federal office.
       ``(2) Other political committees to which section 325 
     applies.--A political committee (not described in paragraph 
     (1)) to which section 325(b)(1) applies shall report all 
     receipts and disbursements made for activities described in 
     paragraphs (1) and (2)(iii) of section 325(b).
       ``(3) Other political committees.--Any political committee 
     to which paragraph (1) or (2) does not apply shall report any 
     receipts or disbursements that are used in connection with a 
     Federal election.
       ``(4) Itemization.--If a political committee has receipts 
     or disbursements to which this subsection applies from any 
     person aggregating in excess of $200 for any calendar year, 
     the political committee shall separately itemize its 
     reporting for such person in the same manner as required in 
     paragraphs (3)(A), (5), and (6) of subsection (b).

[[Page 19889]]

       ``(5) Reporting periods.--Reports required to be filed 
     under this subsection shall be filed for the same time 
     periods required for political committees under subsection 
     (a).''.
       (b) Building Fund Exception to the Definition of 
     Contribution.--Section 301(8) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)) is amended--
       (1) by striking clause (viii); and
       (2) by redesignating clauses (ix) through (xiv) as clauses 
     (viii) through (xiii), respectively.
       (c) Reports by State Committees.--Section 304 of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434), as 
     amended by subsection (a), is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(f) Filing of State Reports.--In lieu of any report 
     required to be filed by this Act, the Commission may allow a 
     State committee of a political party to file with the 
     Commission a report required to be filed under State law if 
     the Commission determines such reports contain substantially 
     the same information.''.
       (d) Other Reporting Requirements.--
       (1) Authorized committees.--Section 304(b)(4) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(b)(4)) is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (H);
       (B) by inserting ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (I); 
     and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(J) in the case of an authorized committee, disbursements 
     for the primary election, the general election, and any other 
     election in which the candidate participates;''.
       (2) Names and addresses.--Section 304(b)(5)(A) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(b)(5)(A)) 
     is amended by inserting ``, and the election to which the 
     operating expenditure relates'' after ``operating 
     expenditure''.

     SEC. 304. SOFT MONEY OF PERSONS OTHER THAN POLITICAL PARTIES.

       Section 304 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 434), as amended by subsection 303, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Election Activity of Persons Other Than Political 
     Parties.--
       ``(1) In general.--A person other than a committee of a 
     political party that makes aggregate disbursements totaling 
     in excess of $10,000 with respect to an election cycle for 
     activities described in paragraph (2) shall file a statement 
     with the Commission--
       ``(A) within 48 hours after the disbursements are made; or
       ``(B) in the case of disbursements that are made within 20 
     days of an election, within 24 hours after the disbursements 
     are made.
       ``(2) Activity.--The activity described in this paragraph 
     is--
       ``(A) any activity described in section 316(b)(2)(A) that 
     refers to any candidate for Federal office, any political 
     party, or any Federal election; and
       ``(B) any activity described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of 
     section 316(b)(2).
       ``(3) Additional statements.--An additional statement shall 
     be filed each time additional disbursements aggregating 
     $10,000 are made by a person described in paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Applicability.--This subsection does not apply to--
       ``(A) a candidate or a candidate's authorized committee; or
       ``(B) an independent expenditure.
       ``(5) Contents.--A statement under this section shall 
     contain such information about the disbursements as the 
     Commission shall prescribe, including--
       ``(A) the name and address of the person or entity to whom 
     the disbursement was made;
       ``(B) the amount and purpose of the disbursement; and
       ``(C) if applicable, whether the disbursement was in 
     support of, or in opposition to, a candidate or a political 
     party, and the name of the candidate or the political 
     party.''.
                         TITLE IV--ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 401. FILING OF REPORTS USING COMPUTERS AND FACSIMILE 
                   MACHINES.

       Section 302(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 434(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (11) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(11) Filing of reports using computers and facsimile 
     machines.--
       ``(A) Required filing.--The Commission may promulgate a 
     regulation under which a person required to file a 
     designation, statement, or report under this Act--
       ``(i) is required to maintain and file a designation, 
     statement, or report for any calendar year in electronic form 
     accessible by computers if the person has, or has reason to 
     expect to have, aggregate contributions or expenditures in 
     excess of a threshold amount determined by the Commission; 
     and
       ``(ii) may maintain and file a designation, statement, or 
     report in that manner if not required to do so under 
     regulations prescribed under clause (i).
       ``(B) Facsimile machine.--The Commission shall promulgate a 
     regulation that allows a person to file a designation, 
     statement, or report required by this Act through the use of 
     facsimile machines.
       ``(C) Verification of signature.--
       ``(i) In general.--In promulgating a regulation under this 
     paragraph, the Commission shall provide methods (other than 
     requiring a signature on the document being filed) for 
     verifying a designation, statement, or report covered by the 
     regulations.
       ``(ii) Treatment of verification.--A document verified 
     under any of the methods shall be treated for all purposes 
     (including penalties for perjury) in the same manner as a 
     document verified by signature.''.

     SEC. 402. AUDITS.

       (a) Random Audits.--Section 311(b) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 438(b)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Commission''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Random audits.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the 
     Commission may conduct random audits and investigations to 
     ensure voluntary compliance with this Act.
       ``(B) Limitation.--The Commission shall not institute an 
     audit or investigation of a candidate's authorized committee 
     under subparagraph (A) until the candidate is no longer a 
     candidate for the office sought by the candidate in that 
     election cycle.
       ``(C) Applicability.--This paragraph does not apply to an 
     authorized committee of a candidate for President or Vice 
     President subject to audit under section 9007 or 9038 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.''.
       (b) Extension of Period During Which Campaign Audits May Be 
     Begun.--Section 311(b) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 438(b)) is amended by striking ``6 months'' 
     and inserting ``12 months''.

     SEC. 403. AUTHORITY TO SEEK INJUNCTION.

       Section 309(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)) is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) Authority to seek injunction.--
       ``(A) In general.--If, at any time in a proceeding 
     described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4), the Commission 
     believes that--
       ``(i) there is a substantial likelihood that a violation of 
     this Act is occurring or is about to occur;
       ``(ii) the failure to act expeditiously will result in 
     irreparable harm to a party affected by the potential 
     violation;
       ``(iii) expeditious action will not cause undue harm or 
     prejudice to the interests of others; and
       ``(iv) the public interest would be best served by the 
     issuance of an injunction;
     the Commission may initiate a civil action for a temporary 
     restraining order or a preliminary injunction pending the 
     outcome of the proceedings described in paragraphs (1), (2), 
     (3), and (4).
       ``(B) Venue.--An action under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     brought in the United States district court for the district 
     in which the defendant resides, transacts business, or may be 
     found, or in which the violation is occurring, has occurred, 
     or is about to occur.'';
       (2) in paragraph (7), by striking ``(5) or (6)'' and 
     inserting ``(5), (6), or (13)''; and
       (3) in paragraph (11), by striking ``(6)'' and inserting 
     ``(6) or (13)''.

     SEC. 404. INCREASE IN PENALTY FOR KNOWING AND WILLFUL 
                   VIOLATIONS.

       Section 309(a)(5)(B) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(5)(B)) is amended by striking ``the 
     greater of $10,000 or an amount equal to 200 percent'' and 
     inserting ``the greater of $15,000 or an amount equal to 300 
     percent''.

     SEC. 405. PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY INDIVIDUALS NOT 
                   QUALIFIED TO VOTE.

       (a) Prohibition.--Section 319 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441e) is amended--
       (1) in the heading by adding ``AND INDIVIDUALS NOT 
     QUALIFIED TO REGISTER TO VOTE'' at the end; and
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``(a) It shall'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(a) Prohibitions.--
       ``(1) Foreign nationals.--It shall''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Individuals not qualified to vote.--It shall be 
     unlawful for an individual who is not qualified to register 
     to vote in a Federal election to make a contribution, or to 
     promise expressly or impliedly to make a contribution, in 
     connection with a Federal election; or for any person to 
     knowingly solicit, accept, or receive a contribution in 
     connection with a Federal election from an individual who is 
     not qualified to register to vote in a Federal election.''.
       (b) Inclusion in Definition of Identification.--Section 
     301(13) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431(13)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' the first place it appears; and
       (B) by inserting ``, and an affirmation that the individual 
     is an individual who is not prohibited by section 319 from 
     making a contribution'' after ``employer''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``and an affirmation 
     that the person is a person that is not prohibited by section 
     319 from making a contribution'' after ``such person''.

     SEC. 406. USE OF CANDIDATES' NAMES.

       Section 302(e) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 432(e)) is amended

[[Page 19890]]

     by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
       ``(4)(A) The name of each authorized committee shall 
     include the name of the candidate who authorized the 
     committee under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) A political committee that is not an authorized 
     committee shall not--
       ``(i) include the name of any candidate in its name, or
       ``(ii) except in the case of a national, State, or local 
     party committee, use the name of any candidate in any 
     activity on behalf of such committee in such a context as to 
     suggest that the committee is an authorized committee of the 
     candidate or that the use of the candidate's name has been 
     authorized by the candidate.''.

     SEC. 407. EXPEDITED PROCEDURES.

       Section 309(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)), as amended by section 403, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(14) Expedited procedure.--
       ``(A) 60 days preceding an election.--If the complaint in a 
     proceeding is filed within 60 days immediately preceding a 
     general election, the Commission may take action described in 
     this paragraph.
       ``(B) Resolution before election.--If the Commission 
     determines, on the basis of facts alleged in the complaint 
     and other facts available to the Commission, that there is 
     clear and convincing evidence that a violation of this Act 
     has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur and it 
     appears that the requirements for relief stated in clauses 
     (ii), (iii), and (iv) of paragraph (13)(A) are met, the 
     Commission may--
       ``(i) order expedited proceedings, shortening the time 
     periods for proceedings under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and 
     (4) as necessary to allow the matter to be resolved in 
     sufficient time before the election to avoid harm or 
     prejudice to the interests of the parties; or
       ``(ii) if the Commission determines that there is 
     insufficient time to conduct proceedings before the election, 
     immediately seek relief under paragraph (13)(A).
       ``(C) Complaint without merit.--If the Commission 
     determines, on the basis of facts alleged in the complaint 
     and other facts available to the Commission, that the 
     complaint is clearly without merit, the Commission may--
       ``(i) order expedited proceedings, shortening the time 
     periods for proceedings under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and 
     (4) as necessary to allow the matter to be resolved in 
     sufficient time before the election to avoid harm or 
     prejudice to the interests of the parties; or
       ``(ii) if the Commission determines that there is 
     insufficient time to conduct proceedings before the election, 
     summarily dismiss the complaint.''.
           TITLE V--SEVERABILITY; REGULATIONS; EFFECTIVE DATE

     SEC. 501. SEVERABILITY.

       If any provision of this Act or amendment made by this Act, 
     or the application of a provision or amendment to any person 
     or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the 
     remainder of this Act and amendments made by this Act, and 
     the application of the provisions and amendment to any person 
     or circumstance, shall not be affected by the holding.

     SEC. 502. REGULATIONS.

       The Federal Election Commission shall promulgate any 
     regulations required to carry out this Act and the amendments 
     made by this Act.

     SEC. 503. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided in this Act, this Act and the 
     amendments made by this Act take effect on the date that is 
     30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. THOMPSON (for himself and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 1503. A bill amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 
App.) to extend the authorization of appropriations for the Office of 
Government. Ethics through fiscal year 2003; to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs


       the office of government ethics authorization act of 1999

  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a statement 
by Senator Lieberman and myself regarding the ``Office of Government 
Ethics Authorization Act of 1999'' be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection the statement was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

   Joint Statement by Senator Fred Thompson, Chairman, Committee on 
 Governmental Affairs, and Senator Joseph Lieberman, Ranking Minority 
 Member, Committee on Governmental Affairs, on the Introduction of the 
       ``Office of Government Ethics Authorization Act of 1999''

       Today we are pleased to join together in introducing the 
     ``Office of Government Ethics Authorization Act of 1999.'' 
     This legislation would reauthorize the Office of Government 
     Ethics for four years, through the end of fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Government Ethics was created in 1978 to 
     administer the Ethics in Government Act. The Office was 
     established as a separate agency in the Executive branch, 
     independent from the Office of Personnel Management, as part 
     of the Office's reauthorization in 1988. The Office is headed 
     by a Director who is appointed to serve a 5-year term with 
     the advice and consent of the Senate. The current Director, 
     Stephen Potts, is serving his second term which expires in 
     August 2000.
       The Office has responsibility for Executive branch policies 
     relating to preventing conflicts of interest on the part of 
     officers and employees in the Executive branch. The Office is 
     a small and respected agency and promotes policies and 
     ethical standards that are implemented by a network of more 
     than 120 Designated Agency Ethics Officers. The Office also 
     provides training and educational programs in an effort to 
     provide guidance to employees throughout the government.
       The Office's current authorization is set to expire at the 
     end of this fiscal year. In introducing this legislation, it 
     is our expectation for the Committee on Governmental Affairs 
     and the Senate to act on a timely basis in reauthorizing this 
     agency.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself and Mr. Specter):
  S. 1504. A bill to improve health care quality and reduce health care 
costs by establishing a National Fund for Health Research that would 
significantly expand the Nation's investment in medical research; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                 national fund for health research act

 Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the 
``National Fund for Health Research Act of 1999''. And I am 
particularly pleased to be joined in this effort by my friend and 
colleague, Senator Specter. This bill is similar to legislation I 
introduced with Senator Specter in the 105th Congress, and with Senator 
Hatfield during the 104th Congress. The bill gained broad bipartisan 
support in both the House and Senate.
  Our proposal would establish a National Fund for Health Research to 
provide additional resources for health research over and above those 
provided to the National Institutes of Health in the annual 
appropriations process. The Fund would greatly enhance the quality of 
health care by investing more in finding preventive measures, cures and 
cost-effective treatments for the major illnesses and conditions that 
strike Americans.
  To finance the Fund, health plans would set aside approximately 1 
percent of all health premiums and transfer the funds to the National 
Fund for Health Research.
  Each year under our proposal amounts within the National Fund for 
Health Research would automatically be allocated to each of the NIH 
Institutes and Centers. Each Institute and Center would receive the 
same percentage as they received of the total NIH appropriation for 
that fiscal year. The set aside would result in a significant annual 
budget increase for NIH.
  In 1994 I argued that any health care reform plan should include 
additional funding for health research. Systematic health care reform 
has been taken off the front burner but the need to increase our 
nation's commitment to health research has not diminished.
  While health care spending devours over $1 trillion annually our 
medical research budget is dying of starvation. The United States 
devotes less than 3 percent of its total health care budget to health 
research. The Defense Department spends 15 percent of its budget on 
research. Does this make sense? The cold war is over but the war 
against disease and disability continues.
  Increased investment in health research is key to reducing health 
costs in the long run. For example, the costs of Alzheimer's will more 
than triple in the coming century--adding further strains to Medicare 
as the baby boomers retire. We know that through research there is a 
real hope of a major breakthrough in this area. Simply delaying the 
onset of Alzheimer's by 5 years would save an estimated $50 billion.
  Gene therapy and treatments for cystic fibrosis and Parkinson's could 
eliminate years of chronic care costs, while saving lives and improving 
patients' quality of life.
  Mr. President, Senator Specter and I do everything we can to increase 
funding for NIH through the Labor, Health

[[Page 19891]]

and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill. But the Balanced 
Budget Act of 1997 has put us on track to dramatically decrease 
discretionary spending, so that the nation's investment in health 
research through the NIH is likely to decline in real terms unless 
corrective legislative action is taken.
  The NIH is not able to fund even 30% of competing research projects 
or grant applications deemed worthy of funding. Science and cutting 
edge medical research are being put on hold. We may be giving up 
possible cures for diabetes, cancer, Parkinson's and countless other 
diseases.
  Mr. President, health research is an investment in our future--it is 
an investment in our children and grandchildren. It holds the promise 
of cure of treatment for millions of Americans.
 Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to join 
Senator Tom Harkin, my colleague and distinguished ranking members of 
the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and 
Education, which I chair, in introducing the National Fund for Health 
Research Act of 1999. This creative proposal, which would create a 
dedicated health research fund in the U.S. Treasury to supplement the 
current federal research funding mechanisms, was first developed by 
Senator Harkin and our former Senate colleague, Senator Mark Hatfield. 
I think their idea is a sound one and ought to be adopted, and I am 
pleased to join Senator Harkin in introducing this legislation as I did 
during the 105th Congress. I have also included this proposal as a 
provision of my comprehensive health care reform legislation, the 
Health Care Assurance Act of 1999 (S. 24), introduced on January 19, 
1999.
  I have said many times that I firmly believe that the National 
Institutes of Health (NIH) is the crown jewel of the Federal 
government, and substantial investment is crucial to allow the 
continuation of the breakthrough research into the next decade. In 
1981, NIH funding was less than $3.6 billion. For the past three years, 
NIH funding has increased by 6.8 percent in fiscal year 1997, 7.1 
percent in fiscal year 1998, and 15 percent in fiscal year 1999, for a 
total of $15.7 billion. Senator Harkin and I are continuing to fight to 
double the NIH budget, a sentiment which was unanimously supported in 
the United States Senate during the 105th Congress.
  I was dismayed, however, upon examining President Clinton's $15.9 
billion budget request for the NIH for fiscal year 2000--only a little 
over two percent growth, far less than the 15 percent needed to double 
NIH. At the President's requested level, new and competing NIH research 
project grants would drop by 1,554--from 9,171 in fiscal year 1999 to 
7,617 in fiscal year 2000. This outlook on future grant awards is 
wholly inadequate to meet the country's most important challenges to 
improve the health and quality of life for millions of Americans.
  To call the President's plan short-sighted would be an 
understatement. In practical terms, two percent amounts to spending 
less than $24 for every American who suffers from coronary heart 
disease. Two percent means slowing the race to cure breast cancer or 
discover a vaccine to prevent the spread of AIDS. And it means that 
some of the most promising new breakthroughs in science, like stem cell 
research, may be postponed for years. Breaking the code for complex 
problems takes a steady and sustained commitment of people and money.
  The National Fund for Health Research Act which we are introducing 
today would continue Senator Harkin's and my unwavering commitment to 
increasing the nation's investment in biomedical research. The 
legislation would create a special fund for health research to 
supplement funding achieved through the regular appropriations 
process--possibly by as much as $6 billion annually. Our legislation 
would require health insurers to transfer to the U.S. Treasury an 
amount equal to 1 percent of all health premiums they receive. To 
ensure that the additional funds generated do not simply replace 
regularly appropriated NIH funds, monies from the health research fund 
would only be released if the total amount appropriated for the NIH in 
that year equaled or exceeded the prior year appropriations.
  We must all recognize that expanding our base of scientific knowledge 
inevitably leads to better health, lower health care costs, and an 
improved quality of life for all Americans. I believe that the creation 
of a fund for health research would bring us closer to those critical 
goals.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the National Fund for 
Health Research Act, and urge its swift adoption.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. THURMOND:
  S. 1506. A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on cyclic olefin 
copolymer resin; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


               duty suspension on certain copolymer resin

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill which 
will suspend the duties imposed on a certain copolymer resin used in 
the production of high technology products. Currently, this resin is 
imported for use in the United States because there is no domestic 
supplier or readily available substitute. Therefore, suspending the 
duties on this copolymer resin would not adversely affect domestic 
industries.
  This bill would temporarily suspend the duty on cyclic olefin 
copolymer resin, which is a resin used in the manufacturing of high 
technology products such as high precision optical lenses and 
laboratory micro liter plates.
  Mr. President, suspending the duty on this resin will benefit the 
consumer by stabilizing the costs of manufacturing the end-use 
products. Further, this suspension will allow domestic producers to 
maintain or improve their ability to compete internationally. There are 
no known domestic producers of this material. I hope the Senate will 
consider these measures expeditiously.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Congressional Record immediately following my remarks.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed to the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1506

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

     SECTION 1. CYCLIC OLEFIN COPOLYMER RESIN.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the 
     Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by 
     inserting in numerical sequence the following new heading:

``9902.39.00  Cyclic olefin       Free    Free      No        On or
               copolymer resin                       change    before 12/
               (CAS No. 26007-43-                              31/
               2) (provided for                                2002''.
               in heading
               3902.90.00)......
 

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     applies with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
     warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 1507. A bill to authorize the integration and consolidation of 
alcohol and substance programs and services provided by Indian tribal 
governments, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian 
Affairs.


 native american alcohol and substance abuse program consolidation act

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Native 
American Alcohol and Substance Abuse Program Consolidation Act of 1999, 
to enable Indian tribes to consolidate and integrate alcohol and 
substance abuse prevention, diagnosis, and treatment programs to 
provide unified and more effective services to Native Americans.
  Native communities continue to be plagued by alcohol and substance 
abuse at staggering rates and this abuse is wreaking havoc on Native 
families across the country.
  Unfortunately, alcohol continues to be an important risk factor 
associated with the top three killers of Native youth--accidents, 
suicide, and homicide.
  Based on 1993 data, the rate of mortality due to alcoholism among 
Native youth ages 15 to 24 was 5.2 per 100,000,

[[Page 19892]]

which is 17 times the rate for whites of the same age.
  Native Americans have higher rates of alcohol and drug use than any 
other racial or ethnic group. Despite previous treatment and preventive 
efforts, alcoholism and substance abuse continue to be prevalent among 
Native youth: 82 percent of Native adolescents admitted to having used 
alcohol, compared with 66 percent of non-Native youth.
  In a 1994 school-based study, 39 percent of Native high school 
seniors reported having ``gotten drunk'' and 39 percent of Native kids 
admitted to using marijuana.
  Alcohol and substance abuse also contributes to other social problems 
including sexually transmitted diseases, child and spousal abuse, poor 
school achievement and dropout, drunk-driving related deaths, mental 
health problems, hopelessness and, too commonly, suicide.
  The Federal Government offers several disparate and currently 
uncoordinated substance abuse prevention and treatment programs for 
which Native Americans are eligible. This bill addresses how to best 
coordinate these programs so that the resources are effectively 
targeted at the communities that need them.
  Program funds from the Department of Education include the Office of 
Elementary and Secondary Education's Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities--National Programs; and the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities--State Grants.
  In the Department of Health and Human Services the programs include 
the Administration for Children and Families' (ACF) Social Services 
Block Grant; the Indian Health Service's (IHS) Urban Indian Health 
Services funds; the IHS's Research funds; the IHS's Alcohol and 
Substance Abuse services including outpatient visits, inpatient days, 
regional treatment centers, admissions, aftercare referrals, and 
emergency placements; the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
Administration (SAMHSA) Grants for Residential Treatment Programs for 
Pregnant and Postpartum Women; the SAMHSA Demonstration Grants for 
Residential Treatment for women and their Children; the SAMHSA 
Cooperative Agreements for Substance Abuse Treatment and Recovery 
Systems for Rural, Remote and Culturally Distinct Populations; the 
SAMHSA Mental Health Planning and Demonstration Projects; the SAMHSA 
Demonstration Grants for the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Among 
High-Risk Populations; the SAMHSA Demonstration Grants on Model 
Projects for Pregnant and Postpartum Women and their Infants; the 
SAMHSA Comprehensive Residential Drug Prevention and Treatment, 
Projects for Substance-Using Women and their Children; and the SAMHSA 
Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse.
  Programs in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 
include Community Planning and Development, Shelter Plus Care; and 
HUD's Drug Elimination Grant funds.
  Department of the Interior program funds include the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, Services to Indian Children, Elderly and Families funds.
  Programs in the Department of Justice include National Institute of 
Justice, Justice Research, Development, and Evaluation Project Grants.
  The Department of Transportation funds include National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration/Federal Highway Administration funds.
  Funds available through the National Institutes of Health--National 
Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism include several different 
grant programs for minorities and the prevention of alcohol abuse.
  The goal of this bill is to authorize tribal governments and inter-
tribal organizations to consolidate these programs through a single 
Federal office, in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and use a single 
implementation plan to reduce the administrative and bureaucratic 
processes and result in more and better services to Native Americans.
  This legislation tracks the widely-hailed and very successful ``477 
model'' that Indian tribes have had used to effectively coordinate 
employment training and related services through the Indian Employment 
Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (Pub. Law 102-
477).
  Under the ``477 model,'' an applicant tribe can file a single 
comprehensive plan to draw and coordinate resources from many federal 
agencies and administer them through one office, the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs in the Department of the Interior.
  To facilitate this inter-agency resource transfer, Secretaries of 
named agencies are required to negotiate and enter into memoranda of 
understanding.
  The bill I am introducing today mirrors the ``477 model'' for 
purposes of alcohol and drug abuse resources.
  I am certain that with this authority, Indian tribes can achieve the 
same high level of success they have had in the employment training 
field.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the legislation 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1507

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Native American Alcohol and 
     Substance Abuse Program Consolidation Act of 1999.''

     SEC. 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       The purposes of this Act are (a) to enable Indian tribes to 
     consolidate and integrate alcohol and other substance abuse 
     prevention, diagnosis and treatment programs to provide 
     unified and more effective and efficient services to Native 
     Americans afflicted with alcohol and other substance abuse 
     problems; and (b) to recognize that Indian tribes can best 
     determine the goals and methods for establishing and 
     implementing prevention, diagnosis and treatment programs for 
     their communities, consistent with the policy of self-
     determination.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purposes of this Act, the following definitions 
     shall apply:
       (1) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' has the 
     same meaning given the term in section 551(1) of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       (2) Indian tribe.--The terms ``Indian tribe'' and ``tribe'' 
     shall have the meaning given the term ``Indian tribe'' in 
     section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act.
       (3) Indian.--The term ``Indian'' shall have the meaning 
     given such term in section 4(d) of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act.
       (4) Secretary.--Except where otherwise provided, the term 
     ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the Interior.

     SEC. 4. INTEGRATION OF SERVICES AUTHORIZED.

       The Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the 
     appropriate Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, Secretary of Education, Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development, United States Attorney General, Secretary 
     of Transportation, and Director of the National Institutes of 
     Health shall, upon the receipt of a plan acceptable to the 
     Secretary submitted by an Indian tribe, authorize the tribe 
     to coordinate, in accordance with such plan, its federally 
     funded alcohol and substance abuse in a manner that 
     integrates the program services involved into a single, 
     coordinated, comprehensive program and reduces administrative 
     costs by consolidating administrative functions.

     SEC. 5. PROGRAMS AFFECTED.

       The programs that may be integrated in any such plan 
     referred to in section 4 shall include any program under 
     which an Indian tribe is eligible for receipt of funds under 
     a statutory or administrative formula for the purposes of 
     prevention, diagnosis or treatment of alcohol and other 
     substance abuse problems and disorders, or any program 
     designed to enhance the ability to treat, diagnose or prevent 
     alcohol and other substance abuse and related problems and 
     disorders.

     SEC. 6. PLAN REQUIREMENTS.

       For a plan to be acceptable pursuant to section 4, it 
     shall--
       (1) Identify the programs to be integrated;
       (2) be consistent with the purposes of this Act authorizing 
     the services to be integrated into this project;
       (3) describe a comprehensive strategy which identifies the 
     full range of existing and potential diagnosis, treatment and 
     prevention programs available on and near the tribe's service 
     area;
       (4) describe the way in which services are to be integrated 
     and delivered and the results expected under the plan;
       (5) identify the project expenditures under the plan in a 
     single budget;
       (6) identify the agency or agencies in the tribe to be 
     involved in the delivery of the services integrated under the 
     plan;

[[Page 19893]]

       (7) identify any statutory provisions, regulations, 
     policies or procedures that the tribe believes need to be 
     waived in order to implement its plan; and
       (8) be approved by the governing body of the tribe.

     SEC. 7. PLAN REVIEW.

       Upon receipt of the plan from a tribal government, the 
     Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of each Federal 
     agency providing funds to be used to implement the plan, and 
     with the tribe submitting the plan. The parties consulting on 
     the implementation of the plan submitted shall identify any 
     waivers of statutory requirements or of Federal agency 
     regulations, policies or procedures necessary to enable the 
     tribal government to implement its plan. Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, the Secretary of the affected agency 
     shall have the authority to waive any statutory requirement, 
     regulation, policy, or procedure promulgated by the affected 
     agency that has been identified by the tribe or the Federal 
     agency to be waived, unless the Secretary of the affected 
     department determines that such a waiver is inconsistent with 
     the purposes of this Act or those provisions of the statute 
     from which the program involved derives its authority which 
     are specifically applicable to Indian programs.

     SEC. 8. PLAN APPROVAL.

       Within 90 days after the receipt of a tribe's plan by the 
     Secretary, the Secretary shall inform the tribe, in writing, 
     of the Secretary's approval or disapproval of the plan, 
     including any request for a waiver that is made as part of 
     the plan submitted by the tribal government. If the plan is 
     disapproved, the tribal government shall be informed, in 
     writing, of the reasons for the disapproval and shall be 
     given an opportunity to amend its plan or to petition the 
     Secretary to reconsider such disapproval, including 
     reconsidering the disapproval of any waiver requested by the 
     Indian Tribe.

     SEC. 9. FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITIES.

       (a) Responsibilities of the Department of the Interior.--
     Within 180 days following the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Labor, the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of 
     Education, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, 
     the United States Attorney General, the Secretary of 
     Transportation, and the Director of the National Institutes 
     of Health shall enter into an interdepartmental memorandum of 
     agreement providing for the implementation of the plans 
     authorized under this Act. The lead agency under this Act 
     shall be the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the 
     Interior. The responsibilities of the lead agency shall 
     include--
       (1) the use of a single report format related to the plan 
     for the individual project which shall be used by a tribe to 
     report on the activities undertaken by the plan;
       (2) the use of a single report format related to the 
     projected expenditures of the individual plan which shall be 
     used by a tribe to report on all plan expenditures;
       (3) the development of a single system of Federal oversight 
     for the plan, which shall be implemented by the lead agency; 
     and
       (4) the provision of technical assistance to a tribe 
     appropriate to the plan, delivered under an arrangement 
     subject to the approval of the tribe participating in the 
     project, except that a tribe shall have the authority to 
     accept or reject the plan for providing the technical 
     assistance and the technical assistance provider; and
       (5) the convening by an appropriate official of the lead 
     agency (whose appointment is subject to the confirmation of 
     the Senate) and a representative of the Indian tribes that 
     carry out projects under this Act, in consultation with each 
     of the Indian tribes that * * *.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 1508. A bill to provide technical and legal assistance for tribal 
justice systems and members of Indian tribes, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Indian Affairs.


                 NATIVE JUSTICE SYSTEMS ENHANCEMENT ACT

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce the ``Indian Tribal 
Justice System Technical and Legal Assistance Act of 1999'' to bolster 
earlier efforts to strengthen Indian tribal justice systems such as the 
Indian Tribal Justice Act of 1933. I want to be clear: the legislation 
I am introducing today is intended to complement, not substitute for, 
the 1993 Act.
  Unfortunately, most Native Americans continue to live in abject 
poverty and as with other indigent groups, access to legal assistance 
is poor.
  In 1997 the Department of Justice published a report showing that 
crime, particularly violent crime, is rampant on Indian lands. The 
Congress and the Administration both properly responded with an 
infusion of millions of dollars for crime prevention, prosecution and 
detention.
  There is also a huge need civil legal assistance in Native 
communities that is not now being met and that is one of the aims of 
the bill I am introducing today.
  Since the late 1960's Indian Legal Services (``ILS'') organizations 
have stepped into the fray to provide basic legal service to individual 
Native Americans and tribes whose members fall within the federal 
poverty guidelines.
  There are now 30 Indian legal service organizations--very small 
programs which receive the bulk of their funds from the Legal Services 
Corporation (LSC). ILS programs provide basic, bread-and-butter legal 
representation to individual Indian people, and small tribes, 
throughout the United States.
  In addition to providing legal help to individual Natives, ILS 
assists tribes in developing tribal justice systems, including training 
court personnel, and strengthening the capacity of tribal courts to 
handle both civil and criminal matters.
  The ILS organizations have been involved in developing written codes 
on tribal law and practice and procedure in tribal courts, training 
tribal judges, developing tribal court ``lay advocate'' programs and 
training lay advocates, and the developing tribal ``peacemaking'' 
systems which are traditional alternative dispute resolution methods.
  The ILS programs carrying out these key functions include the DNA 
Legal Services of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah; the Michigan Indian 
Legal Services; the Dakota Plains Legal Services; Wisconsin Judicare; 
Idaho Legal Aid Services; Oklahoma Indian legal Services; Pine Tree 
Legal Assistance of Maine, and many others.
  Together, tribal governments and the ILS organizations work to ensure 
that Native justice systems work and that Natives and non-Natives alike 
have confidence in tribal justice systems and institutions.
  Generating that confidence is important for a variety of reasons. For 
instance, there are many factors determining whether or not a Native 
community can be competitive and attract investment and business 
activities to boost employment: a solid physical infrastructure, a 
skilled and healthy workforce, access to capital, and a governing 
structure that encourages risk taking and entrepreneurship.
  Part of such an environment is a judicial system that instills 
confidence in businesses as well as individuals that disputes can be 
settled fairly, that contracts will be honored, and that the governed 
recognize the government's authority as legitimate.
  A disordered system does not foster that confidence. Whether or not 
individuals will have access to legal services and well-ordered 
tribunals is key to development.
  A strong ``legal infrastructure'' is widely recognized in American 
business circles as a necessary condition for business development 
whether it be in Russian, Indonesia, inner city America, or on Indian 
lands.
  Within existing appropriations, the bill I am introducing authorizes 
the Attorney General, in consultation with the Office of Tribal 
Justice, to provide assistance to legal service organizations and non-
profit entities to help build capacity of tribal courts and tribal 
justice systems so that confidence in these systems can be augmented, 
and much-needed legal assistance will be provided.
  The three areas targeted for assistance are training for tribal 
judicial personnel, tribal civil legal assistance, and tribal criminal 
assistance.
  I believe that in addition to regulatory reform, physical 
infrastructure, and development assistance, strengthening tribal 
justice systems is another component in bringing real development to 
tribal economies and government.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the legislation be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1508

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the Indian Tribal Justice 
     Technical and Legal Assistance Act of 1999.

[[Page 19894]]



     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds and declares that--
       1) There is a a government-to-government relationship 
     between the United States and Indian tribes;
       2) Indian tribes are sovereign entities and are responsible 
     for exercising governmental authority over Indian tribes;
       3) The rate of violent crime committed in Indian country is 
     approximately twice the rate of violent crime committed in 
     the United States as a whole;
       4) In any community, a high rate of violent crime is a 
     major obstacle to investment, job creation and economic 
     growth;
       5) Tribal justice systems are an essential part of tribal 
     governments and serve as important forums for ensuring the 
     health and safety and the political integrity of tribal 
     governments;
       6) Congress and the Federal courts have repeatedly 
     recognized tribal justice systems as the most appropriate 
     forums for the adjudication of disputes affected personal and 
     property rights on Native lands;
       7) Enhancing tribal court systems and improving access to 
     those systems serves the dual Federal goals of tribal 
     political self-determination and economic self-sufficiency;
       8) There is both inadequate funding and an inadequate 
     coordinating mechanism to meet the technical and legal 
     assistance needs of tribal justice systems and this lack of 
     adequate technical and legal assistance funding impairs their 
     operation;
       9) Tribal court membership organizations have served a 
     critical role in providing training and technical assistance 
     for development and enhancement of tribal justice systems;
       10) Indian legal services programs, as funded partially 
     through the Legal Services Corporation, have an established 
     record of providing cost effective legal assistance to Indian 
     people in tribal court forums, and also contribute 
     significantly to the development of tribal courts and tribal 
     jurisprudence; and
       11) The provision of adequate technical assistance to 
     tribal courts and legal assistance to both individuals and 
     tribal courts is an essential element in the development of 
     strong tribal court systems.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To carry out the responsibility of the United States to 
     Indian tribes and members of Indian tribes by ensuring access 
     to quality technical and legal assistance;
       (2) To strengthen and improve the capacity of tribal court 
     systems that address civil and criminal causes of action 
     under the jurisdiction of Indian tribes;
       (3) To strengthen tribal governments and the economies of 
     Indian tribes through the enhancement and, where appropriate, 
     development of tribal court systems for the administration of 
     justice in Indian country by providing technical and legal 
     assistance services;
       (4) To encourage collaborative efforts between national or 
     regional membership organizations and associations whose 
     membership consists of judicial system personnel within 
     tribal justice systems; non-profit entities which provide 
     legal assistance services for Indian tribes, members of 
     Indian tribes, and/or tribal justice systems; and
       (5) To assist in the development of tribal judicial systems 
     by supplementing prior Congressional efforts such as the 
     Indian Tribal Justice Act (Public Law 103-176).

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act:
       (1) Attorney general.--The term ``Attorney General'' means 
     the Attorney General of the United States.
       (2) Indian lands.--The term ``Indian lands'' shall include 
     lands within the definition of ``Indian country'', as defined 
     in 18 USC 1151; or ``Indian reservations'', as defined in 
     section 3(d) of the Indian Financing Act of 1974, 25 USC 
     1452(d), or section 4(10) of the Indian Child Welfare Act, 25 
     USC 1903(10). For purposes of the preceding sentence, such 
     section 3(d) of the Indian Financing Act shall be applied by 
     treating the term ``former Indian reservations in Oklahoma'' 
     as including only lands which are within the jurisdictional 
     area of an Oklahoma Indian Tribe (as determined by the 
     Secretary of Interior) and are recognized by such Secretary 
     as eligible for trust land status under 25 CFR Part 151 (as 
     in effect on the date of enactment of this sentence).
       (3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' means any 
     Indian tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group 
     or community, including any Alaska Native entity, which 
     administers justice or plans to administer justice under its 
     inherent authority or the authority of the United States and 
     which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and 
     services provided by the United States to Indian tribes 
     because of their status as Indians.
       (4) Judicial personnel.--The term ``judicial personnel'' 
     means any judge, magistrate, court counselor, court clerk, 
     court administrator, bailiff, probation officer, officer of 
     the court, dispute resolution facilitator, or other official, 
     employee, or volunteer within the tribal judicial system.
       (5) Non-profit entities.--The term ``non-profit entity'' or 
     ``non-profit entities'' has the meaning given that term in 
     section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
       (6) Office of tribal justice.--The term ``Office of Tribal 
     Justice'' means the Office of Tribal Justice in the United 
     States Department of Justice.
       (7) Tribal justice system.--The term ``tribal court'', 
     ``tribal court system'', or ``tribal justice system'' means 
     the entire judicial branch, and employees thereof, of an 
     Indian tribe, including, but not limited to, traditional 
     methods and fora for dispute resolution, tribal courts, 
     appellate courts, including inter-tribal appellate courts, 
     alternative dispute resolution systems, and circuit rider 
     systems, established by inherent tribal authority whether or 
     not they constitute a court of record.

 TITLE I--TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LEGAL 
                           ASSISTANCE GRANTS

     SEC. 101. TRIBAL JUSTICE TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 
                   GRANTS

       Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Attorney 
     General, in consultation with the Office of Tribal Justice, 
     shall award grants to national or regional membership 
     organizations and associations whose membership consists of 
     judicial system personnel within tribal justice systems which 
     submit an application to the Attorney General in such form 
     and manner as the Attorney General may prescribe to provide 
     training and technical assistance for the development, 
     enrichment, enhancement of tribal justice systems, or other 
     purposes consistent with this Act.

     SEC. 102. TRIBAL CIVIL LEGAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.

       Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Attorney 
     General, in consultation with the Office of Tribal Justice, 
     shall award grants to non-profit entities, as defined under 
     section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, which provide 
     legal assistance services for Indian tribes, members of 
     Indian tribes, or tribal justice systems pursuant to federal 
     poverty guidelines that submit an application to the Attorney 
     General in such form and manner as the Attorney General may 
     prescribe for the provision of civil legal assistance to 
     members of Indian tribes and tribal justice systems, and/or 
     other purposes consistent with this Act.

     SEC. 103. TRIBAL CRIMINAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.

       Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Attorney 
     General, in consultation with the Office of Tribal Justice, 
     shall award grants to non-profit entities, as defined by 
     section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, which provide 
     legal assistance services for Indian tribes, members of 
     Indian tribes, or tribal justice systems pursuant to federal 
     poverty guidelines that submit an application to the Attorney 
     General in such form and manner as the Attorney General may 
     prescribe for the provision of criminal legal assistance to 
     members of Indian tribes and tribal justice systems, and/or 
     other purposes consistent with this Act. Funding under this 
     Title may apply to programs, procedures, or proceedings 
     involving adult criminal actions, juvenile delinquency 
     actions, and/or guardian-ad-litem appointments arising out of 
     criminal or delinquency acts.

     SEC. 104. NO OFFSET.

       No Federal agency shall offset funds made available 
     pursuant to this Act for Indian tribal court membership 
     organizations or Indian legal services organizations against 
     other funds otherwise available for use in connection with 
     technical or legal assistance to tribal justice systems or 
     members of Indian tribes.

     SEC. 105. TRIBAL AUTHORITY.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed to--
       (1) encroach upon or diminish in any way the inherent 
     sovereign authority of each tribal government to determine 
     the role of the tribal justice system within the tribal 
     government or to enact and enforce tribal laws;
       (2) diminish in any way the authority of tribal governments 
     to appoint personnel;
       (3) impair the rights of each tribal government to 
     determine the nature of its own legal system or the 
     appointment of authority within the tribal government;
       (4) alter in any way any tribal traditional dispute 
     resolution fora;
       (5) imply that any tribal justice system is an 
     instrumentality of the United States; or
       (6) diminish the trust responsibility of the United States 
     to Indian tribal governments and tribal justice systems of 
     such governments.

     SEC. 106. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       For purposes of carrying out the activities under this Act, 
     there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary for fiscal years 2000 through 2004.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 1509. A bill to amend the Indian Employment, Training, and Related 
Services Demonstration Act of 1992, to emphasize the need for job 
creation on Indian reservations, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Indian Affairs.


              indian employment, training and job creation

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Indian 
Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act Amendments 
of 1999.

[[Page 19895]]

  This bill will amend Public Law 102-477, better known as ``the 477 
law'' that authorizes Indian tribes and tribal organizations to bring 
together many federal employment and training programs, consolidate 
them into one plan, and in the process achieve an efficiency that 
otherwise would not be possible.
  The 1992 Act allows tribes to submit one comprehensive plan, to one 
agency, and in the process to bring together resources from the 
Departments of Interior, Labor, Health and Human Services, and others 
for purposes of employment training.
  The keys to the success of ``477'' is that it is entirely voluntary--
with tribes deciding for themselves whether to take advantage of its 
benefits; and second, it involves no federal appropriations of funds to 
administer it. Participating tribes report that the elimination of 
paperwork and bureaucracy are as important as is the administrative 
flexibility that ``477'' provides to tribes.
  The focus of the 1996 federal welfare reform laws now being 
implemented by states and Indian tribes is on getting and retaining 
employment.
  For Native American communities, many of whom suffer unemployment 
rates in the 80 to 90 percent range, job opportunities are difficult to 
come by and as a result the success of the 1996 law in Native 
communities is threatened.
  In the 106th Congress the Committee on Indian Affairs has put 
economic and business development on Native lands at the center of its 
agenda. In addition to regulatory reform, physical infrastructure, and 
access to capital, part of the agenda must be to find creative efforts 
to maximize scarce federal resources for Indian development.
  By all accounts, the 1992 Act has been a success for Native people 
struggling to get employment and training and other services related to 
the world of work.
  The bill I am introducing today will build on that success and 
liberalize tribal authority under the statute, authorize actual job-
creation activities, permit regional consortia of Alaska Native 
entities to participate in the program, and require that the agencies 
and the ``477 tribes'' begin to take the next steps in enlarging the 
scope of ``477'' by bringing in the resources of additional agencies 
whose mission is related to human resource, physical infrastructure, 
and economic development assistance generally.
  A feasibility study and report are due to the authorizing committees 
not later than one year after enactment of the legislation.
  As the Self Governance model has already shown, putting tribes in the 
driver's seat results in better services to consumers, more efficient 
administrative frameworks, and often times a savings in federal 
resources. This bill will improve on an already-successful program and 
help Native communities provide employment training and jobs to their 
citizens.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record,  as follows:

                                S. 1509

       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 ``Indian Employment, Training 
     and Related Services Demonstration Act Amendments of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS, PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that:
       (1) Indian tribes and Alaska Native organizations that have 
     participated in carrying out programs under the Indian 
     Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act 
     of 1992 (25 U.S.C. 3401 et seq.) have--
       (A) improved the effectiveness of employment-related 
     services provided by those tribes and organizations to their 
     members;
       (B) enabled more Indian and Alaska Native people to prepare 
     for and secure employment;
       (C) assisted in transitioning tribal members from welfare 
     to work; and
       (D) otherwise demonstrated the value of integrating 
     employment, training, education and related services.
       (5) the initiatives under the Indian Employment, Training, 
     and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 should be 
     strengthened by ensuring that all federal programs that 
     emphasize the value of work may be included within a 
     demonstration program of an Indian or Alaska Native 
     organization;
       (6) the initiatives under the Indian Employment, Training, 
     and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 should have 
     the benefit of the support and attention of the officials 
     with policymaking authority of
       (A) the Department of the Interior;
       (B) other federal agencies that administer programs covered 
     by the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services 
     Demonstration Act of 1992.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are to demonstrate 
     how Indian tribal governments and integrate the employment, 
     training and related services they provide in order to 
     improve the effectiveness of those services, reduce 
     joblessness in Indian communities, foster economic 
     development on Indian lands, and serve tribally-determined 
     goals consistent with the policies of self-determination and 
     self-governance.

     SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE INDIAN EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND 
                   RELATED SERVICES DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 1992.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 3 of the Indian Employment, 
     Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (25 
     USC 3402) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (3) as 
     paragraphs (2) through (4), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting before paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(1) Federal agency.--The term ``federal agency'' has the 
     same meaning given the term ``agency'' in section 551(1) of 
     title 5, United States Code''.
       (b) Programs Affected.--Section 5 of the Indian Employment, 
     Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (25 
     USC 3404) is amended by striking ``job training, tribal work 
     experience, employment opportunities, or skill development, 
     or any program designed for the enhancement of job 
     opportunities or employment training'' and inserting the 
     following: ``assisting Indian youth and adults to succeed in 
     the workforce, encouraging self-sufficiency, familiarizing 
     Indian youth and adults with the world of work, facilitating 
     the creation of job opportunities and any services related to 
     these activities.''
       ``(c) Plan Review.--Section 7 of the Indian Employment, 
     Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (25 
     USC 3406) is amended)--
       (1) by striking ``Federal department'' and inserting 
     ``Federal agency'';
       (2) by striking Federal departmental'' and inserting 
     ``Federal agency'';
       (3) by striking ``department'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``agency''; and
       (4) in the third sentence, by inserting ``statutory 
     requirement'', after ``to waive any''.
       ``(d) Plan Approval.--Section 8 of the Indian Employment, 
     Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (25 
     USC 3407) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following; ``, including any request for a 
     waiver that is made as part of the plan submitted by the 
     tribal government'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``, including reconsidering the 
     disapproval of any waiver requested by the Indian tribe''.
       ``(e) Job Creation Activities Authorized.--Section 9 of the 
     Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services 
     Demonstration Act of 1992 (25 USC 3407) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General--'' before ``The plan 
     submitted''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Job Creation Opportunities.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provisions of 
     law, including any requirement of a program that is 
     integrated under a plan under this Act, a tribal government 
     may use a percentage of the funds made available under this 
     Act (as determined under paragraph (2)) for the creation of 
     employment opportunities, including providing private sector 
     training placement under section 10.
       (2) Determination of Percentage.--The percentage of funds 
     that a tribal government may use under this subsection is the 
     greater of--
       ``(A) the rate of unemployment in the service area of the 
     tribe up to a maximum of 25 percent; or
       ``(B) 10 percent.
       ``(c) Limitation.--The funds used for an expenditure 
     described in subsection (a) may only include funds made 
     available to the Indian tribe by a federal agency under a 
     statutory or administrative formula''.

     SEC. 3. ALASKA REGIONAL CONSORTIA.

       The Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services 
     Demonstration Act of 1992 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 19. ALASKA REGIONAL CONSORTIA.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, subject to subsection (b), the Secretary shall permit a 
     regional consortium of Alaska Native villages or regional or 
     village corporations (as defined in or established under the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) 
     to carry out a project under a plan that meets the 
     requirements of this Act through

[[Page 19896]]

     a resolution adopted by the governing body of that consortium 
     or corporation.
       (b) Withdrawal.--Nothing in subsection (a) is intended to 
     prohibit an Alaska Native village from withdrawing from 
     participation in any portion of a program conducted pursuant 
     to this Act.

     SEC. 5. REPORT ON EXPANDING THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROGRAM 
                   INTEGRATION.

       Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary, the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, the Secretary of Labor, and the tribes and 
     organizations participating in the integration initiative 
     under this Act shall submit a report to the Committee on 
     Indian Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Resources 
     of the House of Representatives on the opportunities for 
     expanding the integration of human resource development and 
     economic development programs under this Act, and the 
     feasibility of establishing Joint Funding Agreements to 
     authorize tribes to access and coordinated funds and 
     resources from various agencies for purposes of human 
     resources development, physical infrastructure development, 
     and economic development assistance in general. Such report 
     shall identify programs or activities which might be 
     integrated and make recommendations for the removal of any 
     statutory or other barriers to such integration.

     SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take 
     effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCain (for himself, Mrs. Hutchison, Mrs. Feinstein, and 
        Mr. Murkowski):
  S. 1510. A bill to revise the laws of the United States appertaining 
to United States cruise vessels, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


         THE UNITED STATES ship TOURISM DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1999

  Mr. McCain. Mr. President, today I, with Senators Hutchison, 
Feinstein, and Murkowski, are introducing the United States Cruise Ship 
Tourism Development Act of 1999. The purposes of this bill is to 
provide increased domestic cruise opportunities for the American 
cruising public by temporarily reducing barriers to operation in the 
domestic cruise market. I want to start by thanking Senator Hutchison, 
who as Chairman of the Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine 
Subcommittee is continuing her efforts to help rebuild our nation's 
cruise ship industry. She along with Senators Feinstein and Murkowski 
are great partners to have as this legislation moves forward.
  Americans today have a wide variety of choices when it comes to 
vacationing on large oceangoing cruise ships. However, due to barriers 
to entry that were created in 1886, the itineraries, with few 
exceptions, do not include domestic trade. Large cruise ship domestic 
trade options are currently limited to one ocean going cruise vessel in 
Hawaii. Also, the U.S. port calls on international itineraries are 
heavily concentrated in Florida and Alaska due to the proximity of 
these states to neighboring countries. This means that America's 
cruising public is denied the opportunity to cruise to many attractive 
U.S. port destinations, and those ports are denied the economic 
benefits of those visits.
  We have an opportunity in this Congress to temporarily reduce 
barriers for entry into the domestic cruise ship trade, creating new 
U.S. jobs, and generating millions of dollars in new U.S. business 
without any cost to existing U.S. jobs. During the 105th Congress three 
separate bills addressing the domestic cruise ship trade were referred 
to the Commerce Committee. Unfortunately, we were not able to reach a 
consensus on any measure that would remove the barriers created in the 
law measure that would remove the barriers created in the law commonly 
referred to as the Passenger Vessel Services Act. I am hopeful that the 
bill that we are introducing today will see more success.
  While I have made it clear in the past that I would like to do away 
with the trade barriers contained in the Passenger Vessel Services Act, 
this bill does not do that. What this bill does do is allow the 
Secretary of Transportation a limited time to waive certain coastwise 
trade restrictions. It is my strong belief that this will stimulate 
growth and opportunity within the domestice cruise ship trade with the 
beneficiaries being U.S. port cities and business, and more 
importantly, the millions of American citizens who want to be able to 
enjoy cruising between U.S. ports. I expect some of my colleagues on 
the on the Commerce Committee may want to make additional changes to 
this bill in Committee. I look forward to working these issues out with 
them in the coming months.
  I believe it is important for this Congress to take action on this 
issue in order to maximize the economic growth potential of the 
domestic cruise ship trade and the cruising opportunities for America's 
public.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.

                                S. 1510

       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 SECTIONS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``United 
     States Cruise Ship Tourism Development Act of 1999''.
       (b) Table of Sections.--The table of sections for this Act 
     is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of sections.
Sec. 2. Definitions.

                    Title I--Operations Under Permit

Sec. 101. Domestic cruise vessel.
Sec. 102. Domestic itinerary operating requirements.
Sec. 103. Certain operations prohibited.
Sec. 104. Limited employment of eligible cruise vessels in the 
              coastwise trade of the United States.
Sec. 105. Priorities within domestic markets.
Sec. 106. Construction standards.

      Title II--Post-Permit Operations of Eligible Cruise Vessels

Sec. 201. Continued operation in domestic itinerary requirements.

                      Title III--Other Provisions

Sec. 301. Amendment of title XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936
Sec. 302. Application with Jones Act and other Acts.
Sec. 303. Glacier Bay and other National Park Service area permits.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Eligible cruise vessel.--The term ``eligible cruise 
     vessel'' means a cruise vessel that--
       (A) is documented under the laws of the United States or 
     the laws of another country;
       (B) is not otherwise qualified to engage in the coastwise 
     trade between ports in the United States;
       (C) was delivered after January 1, 1980;
       (D) provides a full range of overnight accommodations, 
     entertainment, dining, and other services for its passengers;
       (E) has a fixed smoke detection and sprinkler system 
     installed throughout the accommodation and service spaces, or 
     will have such a system installed within the time period 
     required by the 1992 Amendments to the Safety of Life at Sea 
     Convention of 1974; and
       (F) displaces--
       (i) greater than 20,000 gross registered tons; or
       (ii) more than 9,000 gross registered tons and has an all-
     suites luxury configuration with a minimum of 240 square feet 
     per revenue room.
       (2) Itinerary.--The term ``itinerary'' means the route 
     travelled by a cruise vessel on a single voyage that begins 
     at the first port of embarkation for passengers on that 
     voyage, includes each port at which the vessel docks before 
     the last port of disembarkation for such passengers, and ends 
     at that last port of disembarkation.
       (3) Operating day.--The term ``operating day'' means a day 
     of the week on which a vessel embarks, transports, or 
     disembarks passengers.
       (4) Operator.--The term ``operator'' means the owner, 
     operator, or charterer.
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Transportation.
       (6) United states-flag vessel.--The term ``United States-
     flag vessel'' means a vessel documented under subsection (a) 
     or (d) of section 12102 of title 46, United States Code.

                    TITLE I--OPERATIONS UNDER PERMIT

     SEC. 101. DOMESTIC CRUISE VESSEL.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the provisions of section 
     8 of the Act of June 19, 1886 (46 U.S.C. App. 289), or any 
     other provision of law, the Secretary may issue a permit for 
     an eligible cruise vessel to operate in domestic itineraries 
     in the transportation of passengers in the coastwise trade 
     between ports in the United States.
       (b) Maximum Operating Days.--An eligible cruise vessel not 
     documented under the laws of the United States that is 
     operated under a permit issued by the Secretary under 
     subsection (a) may not be operated under that permit for more 
     than 200 operating days.
       (c) Expiration of Permit Authority.--Except as otherwise 
     provided in section 201 of this Act, a permit issued by the 
     Secretary under subsection (a) shall terminate December 31, 
     2006.

[[Page 19897]]

       (d) Operating Window.--The authority of the Secretary to 
     issue a permit under subsection (a) begins on the day after 
     the date of enactment of this Act and terminates on the day 
     that is 3 years after that date.

     SEC. 102. DOMESTIC ITINERARY OPERATING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in section 104 of this 
     Act, the Secretary may not approve an itinerary for a voyage 
     commencing less than 1 year after the date of enactment of 
     this Act requested by an eligible cruise vessel that is not 
     documented under the laws of the United States.
       (b) Regulatory Requirements.--The Secretary may not issue a 
     permit under section 101(a) for an eligible cruise vessel not 
     documented under the laws of the United States unless the 
     operator establishes to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that, except as otherwise provided in this Act, the vessel 
     will be operated in full compliance with all rules, 
     regulations, and operating requirements relating to health, 
     safety, environmental protection and other appropriate 
     operational standards (as determined by the Secretary), that 
     would apply to any United States-flag cruise vessel operating 
     in domestic itineraries in the transportation of passengers 
     under a permit issued under section 101(a). The Secretary 
     shall issue final rules under this section within 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Repairs.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may not issue a permit under 
     section 101(a) for an eligible cruise vessel unless the 
     operator establishes to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that--
       (A) any repair, maintenance, alteration, or other 
     preparation of the vessel for operation under a permit issued 
     under section 101(a) has been, or will be, performed in a 
     United States shipyard; and
       (B) any repair or maintenance of the vessel after a permit 
     is issued under that section and before the expiration of the 
     operating limitation period in section 101(b) will be 
     performed in a United States shipyard.
       (2) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive the requirements of 
     paragraph (1) if the Secretary finds that the repair, 
     maintenance, alterations, or other preparation services are 
     not available in the United States or if an emergency 
     dictates that the ship proceed to a foreign port.
       (d) Escrow Account.--The Secretary may not issue a permit 
     under section 101(a) for an eligible cruise vessel unless the 
     operator agrees to deposit $5 for each passenger embarking on 
     that vessel while operating under the permit into the escrow 
     fund established under section 1108 of the Merchant Marine 
     Act, 1936 (46 U.S.C. App. 1270a).
       (e) Compliance.--If the Secretary determines that an 
     eligible cruise vessel is not in compliance with any 
     commitment made to the Secretary by its operator under this 
     Act, the permit issued for that vessel under section 101(a) 
     shall be null and void.

     SEC. 103. CERTAIN OPERATIONS PROHIBITED.

       An eligible cruise vessel operating in domestic itineraries 
     under a permit issued under section 101(a) may not--
       (1) operate as a ferry;
       (2) regularly carry for hire both passengers and vehicles 
     or other cargo; or
       (3) operate between or among the islands of Hawaii.

     SEC. 104. LIMITED EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN-FLAG CRUISE SHIPS IN 
                   THE COASTWISE TRADE OF THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 12106 of title 46, 
     United States Code, section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 
     1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), and section 8 of the Act of June 
     19, 1886 (46 U.S.C. App. 289), the Secretary may approve the 
     employment in the coastwise trade of the United States of an 
     eligible cruise vessel operating under a permit issued under 
     section 101(a) of this Act for repositioning as provided by 
     under subsection (b) or for charter as provided by subsection 
     (c).
       (b) Repositioning.--An eligible cruise vessel not 
     documented under the laws of the United States operating 
     under a permit issued under section 101(a) of this Act may be 
     employed in the coastwise trade during the first year after 
     the date of enactment of this Act for not more than 2 
     voyages, the coastwise trade portion of which does not exceed 
     2 weeks and includes transportation of passengers for hire--
       (1) from one coast of the United States through the Panama 
     Canal to another coast of the United States; or
       (2) along one coast of the United States during a voyage 
     between 2 foreign countries.
       (c) Charters.--An eligible cruise vessel not documented 
     under the laws of the United States operating under a permit 
     issued under section 101(a) of this Act may be employed in 
     the coastwise trade during the first year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act if it is time-chartered to a charterer 
     that--
       (1) does not own or operate a cruise ship; and
       (2) is not affiliated with an owner or operator of a cruise 
     ship.
       (d) Priorities.--Section 105 applies to vessels employed in 
     the coastwise trade under this section.

     SEC. 105. PRIORITIES WITHIN DOMESTIC MARKETS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall, by regulation, 
     establish a priority system for cruise vessels providing 
     passenger service in domestic itineraries within 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Priority to U.S.-Built or U.S.-Rebuilt Vessels.--Under 
     the regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary, a cruise 
     vessel built or rebuilt in the United States and documented 
     under the laws of the United States shall have priority over 
     any other cruise vessel of comparable size operating in a 
     comparable market under a permit issued under section 101(a).
       (c) Priority to U.S.-Flag Vessels.--The Secretary shall 
     prescribe regulations under which a cruise vessel documented 
     under the laws of the United States that is not built or 
     rebuilt in the United States has priority over an eligible 
     cruise vessel of comparable size not documented under the 
     laws of the United States that is operating in a comparable 
     market.
       (d) Factors Considered.--In determining and assigning 
     priorities under the regulations, the Secretary shall 
     consider, among other factors determined by the Secretary to 
     be appropriate--
       (A) the scope of a vessel's itinerary;
       (B) the time frame within which the vessel will serve a 
     particular itinerary; and
       (C) the size of the vessel.
       (e) Implementation.--
       (1) Intinerary submission required.--An eligible cruise 
     vessel may not be operated in a domestic itinerary unless the 
     operator has submitted a proposed itinerary for that vessel, 
     in accordance with this subsection, for cruise itineraries 
     for the calendar year beginning 2 years after the date on 
     which the itinerary is required to be submitted under 
     paragraph (2).
       (2) Time and manner of submission.--Each operator of an 
     eligible cruise vessel to be operated in a domestic itinerary 
     shall submit a proposed itinerary to the Secretary in the 
     form required by the Secretary in February of each year 
     beginning after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (3) Revisions and later submissions.--The Secretary shall 
     permit late submissions and revisions of submissions after 
     the final list of approved itineraries is published under 
     paragraph (4)(C) and before the date that is 90 days before 
     the start date of a requested itinerary, but a late 
     submission or revision by a higher priority cruise vessel may 
     not displace a priority assigned on the basis of timely 
     submission by a lower priority cruise vessel. If operators of 
     comparable vessels submit comparable requests within 30 days 
     of each other, the priorities of this section apply at the 
     discretion of the Secretary.
       (4) Scheduling.--
       (A) Action by secretary.--Within 60 days after receiving an 
     itinerary submitted under this subsection, the Secretary 
     shall--
       (i) review the schedule for compliance with the priorities 
     established by this section;
       (ii) advise affected cruise ship operators of any specific 
     itinerary that is not available and the reason it is not 
     available; and
       (iii) publish a proposed list of approved itineraries.
       (B) Operators response.--If the Secretary advises an 
     operator under subparagraph (A)(ii) that a requested 
     itinerary is not available, the operator may respond to the 
     Secretary's advice within 30 days after it is received by the 
     operator by appealing the Secretary's decision or by 
     submitting a new itinerary proposal.
       (C) Resolution of conflicts.--As soon as practicable after 
     the end of the 30-day period described in subparagraph (B), 
     the Secretary shall--
       (i) resolve any appeals and consider new itinerary 
     proposals;
       (ii) advise cruise ship operators who responded under 
     subparagraph (B) of the Secretary's decision with respect to 
     the appeal or the new itinerary proposal; and
       (iii) publish a final list of approved itineraries.
       (f) Itineraries Before Final List Is First Published.--
       (1) Requests.--For itineraries before the first calendar 
     year for which the Secretary publishes a final list of 
     approved itineraries under subsection (e), the operator of a 
     cruise vessel may submit a request for an itinerary to be 
     sailed before that calendar year.
       (2) Conflicting higher priority use.--If the itinerary 
     submitted by an operator under paragraph (1) conflicts with 
     an itinerary in use by a vessel with a higher priority under 
     this section, the Secretary shall disapprove the request and 
     notify the operator of the disapproval and the reason for the 
     disapproval within 5 days (Saturdays, Sundays, and legal 
     public holidays (as defined in section 6103 of title 5, 
     United States Code, excepted) after the request is received.
       (3) No initial conflict.--If the itinerary submitted by an 
     operator under paragraph (1) does not conflict with an 
     itinerary in use by a vessel with a higher priority under 
     this section, the Secretary shall publish the request and the 
     requested itinerary immediately. If, within 30 days after the 
     request is published, the operator of a cruise vessel with a 
     higher priority under this section requests the use of the 
     published itinerary, then the Secretary shall deny the 
     published request and approve the request for the higher 
     priority vessel. If no operator of a cruise vessel with a 
     higher priority under this section requests the use of the 
     published

[[Page 19898]]

     itinerary within 30 days after it is published, the Secretary 
     shall approve the requested itinerary and publish notice of 
     the approval.
       (4) Publication of interim itineraries.--Until the first 
     publication of a final list of approved itineraries under 
     subsection (e), the Secretary shall publish, on a quarterly 
     basis, a list of itineraries approved under this subsection.
       (g) Report.--The Secretary shall issue an annual report on 
     the number of operating days used by each cruise vessel 
     assigned a priority under this section.

     SEC. 106. CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.

       An eligible cruise vessel for which the Secretary has 
     issued a permit under section 101(a) is deemed to be in 
     compliance with the requirements of section 3309 of title 46, 
     United States Code, if it meets the standards and conditions 
     for the issuance of a control verification certificate for a 
     cruise vessel documented under the laws of a foreign country 
     embarking passengers in the United States.

      TITLE II--POST-PERMIT OPERATIONS OF ELIGIBLE CRUISE VESSELS

     SEC. 201. CONTINUED OPERATION IN DOMESTIC ITINERARY 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--After the expiration of its period of 
     operations under a permit issued under section 101(a), an 
     eligible cruise vessel not documented under the laws of the 
     United States may not operate in domestic itineraries unless 
     it meets the following conditions:
       (1) Documentation.--The vessel has been issued a 
     certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement.
       (2) Operating crew; support staff.--Each member of the 
     vessel's operating crew licensed or certified by the United 
     States Coast Guard is a citizen or resident alien of the 
     United States as required by section 8103 of title 46, United 
     States Code, and each individual employed aboard the vessel 
     who is not a member of the operating crew is a citizen or 
     permanent resident of the United States.
       (b) Construction plan.--The operator of an eligible cruise 
     vessel issued a permit under section 101(a) of this Act shall 
     demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that, as of 
     the date on which the vessel is documented under the laws of 
     the United States--
       (1) it has a plan for the construction of a cruise vessel 
     in the United States; or
       (2) it is a party to, or has made substantial progress 
     toward entering into, an enforceable contract for the 
     construction of such a vessel in the United States.
       (c) Expiration of Coastwise Endorsement.--The coastwise 
     endorsement for an eligible cruise vessel operating under 
     subsection (a) shall expire 24 months after the date on which 
     construction is completed on the last vessel the operator of 
     the eligible cruise vessel is obligated to construct in the 
     United States under the contract described in subsection (b).
       (d) Reflagging under Foreign Registry.--Notwithstanding 
     section 9(c) of the Shipping Act, 1916 (46 U.S.C. App. 808), 
     the operator of an eligible cruise ship issued a certificate 
     of documentation with a coastwise endorsement, or a cruise 
     vessel constructed under a contract described in subsection 
     (a)(4), may place that vessel under foreign registry. The 
     Secretary shall revoke the coastwise endorsement for any such 
     vessel placed under foreign registry under this subsection 
     permanently. Any vessel the coastwise endorsement for which 
     is revoked under this subsection is not eligible thereafter 
     for coastwise endorsement.

                      TITLE III--OTHER PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. AMENDMENT OF TITLE XI OF THE MERCHANT MARINE ACT, 
                   1936.

       (a) Risk Factor.--Section 1103(h) of the Merchant Marine 
     Act, 1936 (46 U.S.C. App. 1103(h)) is amended by adding at 
     the end thereof the following:
       ``(5) For purposes of the risk factor described in 
     paragraph (3)(I), the Secretary shall consider an applicant 
     for a guarantee, or a commitment to guarantee, under 
     subsection (a) an obligation in connection with a contract 
     described in section 201(a)(4) of the United States Cruise 
     Ship Tourism Development Act of 1999 to possess the necessary 
     operating ability, experience, and expertise required if the 
     applicant demonstrates to satisfaction of the Secretary that 
     its personnel have the experience and ability to operate 
     cruise vessels.''.
       (b) Qualifications.--Section 1104A(b) of the Merchant 
     Marine Act, 1936 (46 U.S.C. App. 1274(b)) is amended by 
     adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``For purposes of paragraph (1), the Secretary shall 
     consider an obligor with a contract described in section 
     201(b)(2) of the United States Cruise Ship Tourism 
     Development Act of 1999 to possess the ability necessary to 
     the adequate operation and maintenance of the cruise vessel 
     that serves as security for the guarantee of the Secretary if 
     the obligor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that its personnel have the experience and ability to operate 
     cruise vessels.''.

     SEC. 302. APPLICATION WITH JONES ACT AND OTHER ACTS.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this Act affects or otherwise 
     modifies the authority contained in--
       (1) Public Law 87-77 (46 U.S.C. App. 289b) authorizing the 
     transportation of passengers and merchandise in Canadian 
     vessels between ports in Alaska and the United States; or
       (2) Public Law 98-563 (46 U.S.C. App. 289c) permitting the 
     transportation of passengers between Puerto Rico and other 
     United States ports.
       (b) Jones Act.--Nothing in this Act affects or modifies the 
     Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 861 et seq.).

     SEC. 303. GLACIER BAY AND OTHER NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AREA 
                   PERMITS.

       Notwithstanding the last sentence of section 3(g) of Public 
     Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-2(g)), the Secretary of the 
     Interior, after consultation with the Secretary of 
     Transportation, may issue new or otherwise available permits 
     to United States-flag vessels carrying passengers for hire to 
     enter Glacier Bay or any other area within the jurisdiction 
     of the National Park Service. Any such permit shall not 
     affect the rights of any person that, on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, holds a valid permit to enter Glacier 
     Bay or such other area.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. DODD, Mr. ROBB, Mr. 
        LEVIN, Mrs. MURRAY, and Mr. DASCHLE):
  S. 1511. A bill to provide for education infrastructure improvement, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions.


                 21st century school modernization act

 Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, last month I had the honor of 
accompanying President Clinton and Education Secretary Richard Riley on 
a visit to Amos Hiatt Middle School in Des Moines, Iowa. We were joined 
by a high school teacher named Ruth Ann Gaines and an 8th grade 
student, Catherine Swoboda for a discussion on the need to modernize 
our nation's schools.
  Hiatt Middle School opened its doors in 1925 and students spend all 
but a few hours a week in classrooms built during a time when Americans 
could not imagine the technological advances that would occur by the 
end of the century.
  In 1925, Americans were flocking to movie theaters to see--and hear--
the first talking motion picture--Al Jolson's ``The Jazz Singer.'' The 
students who walked through the doors of the brand new Hiatt school 
that year could not imagine IMAX theaters with surround sound where a 
movie goer actually becomes a part of the film.
  In 1925, consumers were lining up in department stores to buy 
novelties like electric phonographs, dial telephones, and self-winding 
watches. CDS, DVD players, cellular telephones or palm pilots were 
unthinkable.
  And, the introduction of state-of-the art technologies like rural 
electrification and crop dusting were revolutionizing the lives of 
families and farmers alike.
  There have been incredible technological and scientific advances in 
the past seven decades. Yet, our schools have not kept pace with the 
times. We continue to educate our children in schools built and 
equipped in bygone eras.
  Mr. President, Iowa has a long and proud tradition when it comes to 
public education--a tradition which dates back to before statehood.
  As a result of the Land Ordinance of 1785, every township in the new 
Western Territory was required to set aside 640 acres of land for 
support of public education. Iowa's first elementary school was 
established in 1830 and the first high school in 1850.
  In 1858, the Iowa Free School Act laid the foundation for Iowa's 
public school system. By 1859 the state had 4,200 public schools--some 
in log cabins.
  This long commitment to education has brought great results.
  From 1870 on into this century, Iowa had the nation's highest 
literacy rate and the nation's highest test scores. Iowa students 
continue to do well but we must do better. Our public education system 
has served us well. But, the times have changed dramatically.
  The thousands of one-room school houses that dotted the countryside 
served us well for many generations. But time marches on and so must 
our schools. Just as the pot-belly stove gave way to central heat; 
candles gave way for electric lights; the blackboard and chalk must 
make way for the computer. We must make sure that every child and every 
school can facilitate

[[Page 19899]]

the technology of the 21st century. However, Iowa State University 
reports that we need at least $4 billion over the next ten years to 
repair and upgrade school buildings and Iowa and make sure they can 
effectively utilize educational technology.
  Mr. President, the facts about the need to modernize and upgrade our 
nation's pubic school facilities are well known.
  The General Accounting Office estimates that 14 million American 
children attend classes in schools that are unsafe or inadequate and it 
will cost $112 billion to upgrade existing public schools to overall 
good condition. In addition, GAO reports that 46 percent of schools 
lack adequate electrical wiring to support the full-scale use of 
technology.
  Enrollment in elementary and secondary schools is at all time high 
and will continue to grow over the next 10 years making it necessary 
for the United States to build an additional 6,000 schools.
  The American Society of Civil Engineers reports that public schools 
are in worse condition that any other sector of our national 
infrastructure. I ask unanimous consent that a report card on the 
nation's infrastructure be inserted in the record at the conclusion of 
my remarks.
  To respond to this critical national problem, I am introducing the 
21st Century School Modernization Act. I am pleased to have Senators 
Kennedy, Robb, Levin and Murray as cosponsors of this proposal.
  This legislation reauthorizes direct federal grants to local school 
districts for the repair, renovation of construction of public schools. 
These grants are critically important to districts in impoverished 
areas that may not benefit from the tax-oriented proposals. Secondly, 
the bill builds a new partnership with states by creating State 
Infrastructure Banks to provide subsidized loans for school 
modernization purposes. Finally, the bill provides grants to assist 
school districts in the planning and design of new facilities that will 
serve as the center of the community.
  The need to rebuild our nation's crumbling public schools is clear 
and I believe we must fight this battle on two critical fronts--this 
session's reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
and by enacting legislation to provide targeted tax relief. The 21st 
Century School Modernization Act complements tax-oriented plans, such 
as those proposed by President Clinton and Senators Daschle, Lautenberg 
and Robb, to provide school modernization tax credits to finance at 
least $25 billion in public school construction or renovation.
  Mr. President, if the nicest thing our kids ever see are shopping 
malls, sports arenas, and movie theaters, and the most rundown place 
they see is their school, what signal are we sending them about the 
value we place on education and the future?
  Let me give your some firsthand testimony from Jonathan Kozol's book, 
Savage Inequalities. Kozol writes about a school in Washington, D.C.'s 
low-income Anacostia district:
  Tunisia, a fifth grader in Washington, D.C., tells Kozol:

       It's like this. The school is dirty. There isn't any 
     playground. There's a hole in the wall behind the principal's 
     desk. What we need to do is first rebuild the school. Build a 
     playground. Plant a lot of flowers. Paint the classrooms. Fix 
     the hole in the principal's office. Buy doors for the toilet 
     stalls in the girl's bathroom. Make it a beautiful clean 
     building. Make it pretty. Way it is, I feel ashamed.

  Tunisia tells the story better than any politician can. She faces it 
every day when the school bell rings. We can and we must do a better 
job for Tunisia and her peers.
  This is a serious national problem. And, it demands a comprehensive 
national response. The 21st Century School Modernization Act is a key 
part of that comprehensive national response and I urge my colleagues 
to support this legislation.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I strongly support this proposal to 
invest more in rebuilding and modernizing the nation's schools. I 
commend Senator Harkin for his leadership on this issue, and I urge my 
colleagues to support this legislation, which is necessary to help the 
nation meet the critical need to modernize and rebuild crumbling and 
overcrowded schools.
  Schools, communities, and governments at every level have to do more 
to improve student achievement. Schools need smaller classes, 
particular in the early grades. They need stronger parent involvement. 
They need well-trained teachers in the classroom who keep up with 
current developments in their field and the best teaching practices. 
They need after-school instruction for students who need extra help, 
and after-school programs to engage students in constructive 
activities. They need safe, modern facilities with up-to-date 
technology.
  But, all of these reforms will be undermined if facilities are 
inadequate. Sending children to dilapidated, overcrowded facilities 
sends a message to these children. It tells them they don't matter. No 
CEO would tolerate a leaky ceiling in the board room, and no teacher 
should have to tolerate it in the classroom. We need to do all we can 
to ensure that children are learning in safe, modern buildings.
  I am also pleased to be a cosponsor of Senator Robb's Public School 
Modernization and Overcrowding Relief Act, which provides tax 
incentives to rebuild and modernize schools. Senator Harkin's bill is a 
necessary complement to that legislation. Although tax incentives are 
an important way to meet the nation's critical school infrastructure 
needs, they do not meet the needs of all communities. The neediest 
communities need our direct support--and they need it now.
  Senator Harkin's legislation authorizes discretionary funds to help 
local school districts and states repair, renovate, and rebuild 
crumbling public schools. It provides targeted discretionary grants to 
public schools that have major needs. To do so, it creates a revolving 
loan fund at the state level, which would provide low-interest or no-
interest loans to repair existing schools or construct new facilities. 
The legislation will also provide a grant to help local school 
districts in the planning and design of new facilities that would 
include input from parents, teachers, and the community.
  Nearly one third of all public schools are more than 50 years old. 14 
million children in a third of the nation's schools are learning in 
substandard buildings. Half of all schools have at least one 
unsatisfactory environmental condition. The problems with ailing school 
buildings aren't the problems of the inner city alone. They exist in 
almost every community, urban, rural, or suburban.
  In addition to modernizing and renovating dilapidated schools, 
communities need to build new schools in order to keep pace with rising 
enrollments and to reduce class sizes. Elementary and secondary school 
enrollment has reached an all-time high again this year of 53 million 
students, and will continue to grow.
  The Department of Education estimates that 2,400 new public schools 
will be needed by 2003 to accommodate rising enrollments. The General 
Accounting Office estimates that it will cost communities $112 billion 
to repair and modernize the nation's schools. Congress should lend a 
helping hand and do all we can to help schools and communities across 
the country meet this challenge.
  In Massachusetts, 41 percent of schools report that at least one 
building needs extensive repairs or should be replaced. 80 percent of 
schools report at least one unsatisfactory environmental factor. 48 
percent have inadequate heating, ventilation, or air conditioning. And 
36 percent report inadequate plumbing systems.
  Last year, I visited Everett Elementary School in Dorchester. The 
school is experiencing serious overcrowding. The average class size is 
28 students. The principal of the school gave up her office and moved 
into a closet in the hall in order to help accommodate rising 
enrollment. When the school wants to use the multi-purpose auditorium/
library, the rolling bookcases are moved to the basement, and the 
library has to close for the rest of the day.

[[Page 19900]]

  Two cafeterias at Bladensburg High School in Prince Georges County, 
Maryland were recently closed because they were infested with mice and 
roaches. A teacher commented, ``It's disgusting. It causes chaos when 
the mice run around the room.'' At an elementary school in Montgomery, 
Alabama, a ceiling which had been damaged by leaking water collapsed 
only 40 minutes after the children had left for the day.
  Most of Los Angeles' school buildings are 30 to 70 years old. 
Enrollment rose from 539,000 in 1980 to 691,000 in 1998, an increase of 
28 percent. District officials expect an additional 50,000 students 
over the next five years.
  In Detroit, Michigan, over half--150 of the 263--school buildings 
were built before 1930. The average age is 61 years old, and some date 
to the 1800's. Detroit estimates that the city has $5 billion in unmet 
repair and new construction needs. Detroit voters approved a $1.5 
billion, 15-year school construction program, but it's not enough.
  New York City school enrollment has grown by 100,000 students, to a 
total of 1,083,000 since 1990. School officials expect up to an 
additional 90,000 students by 2004. P.S. 7 was built for 530 students, 
but 1,048 students are now enrolled. P.S. 108 was built for 280 
students, however 808 students are now enrolled. New York City 
education officials have identified $7.5 billion in building needs.
  Schools across the country are struggling to meet needs such as 
these, but they can't do it alone. The federal government should join 
with state and local governments and community organizations to ensure 
that all children have the opportunity for a good education in a safe 
and up-to-date school building.
  Children need and deserve a good education in order to succeed in 
life. But they cannot obtain that education if school roofs are falling 
down around them, if sewage is backing up through faulty plumbing, if 
asbestos is flaking off the walls and ceilings, if schools lack 
computers and modern technology and classrooms are overcrowded. We need 
to help states and communities rebuild their crumbling schools, 
modernize old buildings, and expand facilities to accommodate reduced 
class sizes.
  I urge my colleagues to support Senator Harkin's 21st Century 
Modernization Act. The time is now to do all we can to rebuild and 
modernize public schools, so that all children can learn in safe, well-
equipped facilities.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 1512. A bill to provide educational opportunities for 
disadvantaged children, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


          INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION REGARDING SCHOOL CHOICE

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing legislation to 
authorize a three-year nationwide school choice demonstration program 
targeted at children from economically disadvantaged families. The 
program would expand educational opportunities for low-income children 
by providing parents and students the freedom to choose the best school 
for their unique academic needs, while encouraging schools to be 
creative and responsive to the needs of all students.
  This legislation is identical to the school choice amendment which I 
offered on July 30, 1999 to S.1429, the Taxpayer Refund Act of 1999. I 
am gravely disappointed that the Senate failed to pass this amendment 
as a part of the Taxpayer Refund Act. However, I am committed to seeing 
it implemented before Congress adjourns this year and will be working 
with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and on the Health, 
Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP) to ensure that this 
measure is implemented before Congress adjourns, perhaps as a part of 
the legislation reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act (ESEA).
  This bill authorizes $1.8 billion annually for fiscal years 2001 
through 2003 to be used to provide school choice vouchers to 
economically disadvantaged children through the nation. The funds would 
be divided among the states based upon the number of children they have 
enrolled in public schools. Then, each state would conduct a lottery 
among low-income children who attend the public schools with the lowest 
academic performance in their state. Each child selected in the lottery 
would receive $2,000 per year for three years to be used to pay tuition 
at any school of their choice in the state, including private or 
religious schools. The money could also be used to pay for 
transportation to the school or supplementary educational services to 
meet the unique needs of the individual student.
  In total, this bill authorizes $5.4 billion for the three-year school 
choice demonstration program, as well as a GAO evaluation of the 
program upon its completion. The cost of this important test of school 
vouchers is fully offset by eliminating more than $5.4 billion in 
unnecessary and inequitable corporate tax loopholes which benefits the 
ethanol, sugar, gas and oil industries.
  First, the legislation eliminates tax credits for ethanol producers, 
eliminating a $1.5 billion subsidy. Ethanol is an inefficient, 
expensive fuel that has not lived up to claims that it would reduce 
reliance on foreign oil or reduce impact on the environment. It takes 
more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the amount of energy 
that a gallon of ethanol contains. Ethanol tax credits are simply a 
subsidy for corn producers, and the amendment ends the taxpayers' 
support for this outdated program.
  Second, the bill eliminates three subsidies enjoyed by the oil and 
gas industry, totaling $3.9 billion. It phases out oil and gas 
industry's special right to fully deduct capital costs for drilling, 
exploration and development; eliminates the 15 percent tax credit for 
recovering oil using particular methods; and ends special right of oil 
and gas property owners to claim unlimited passive losses under income 
and alternative minimum tax provisions. Subsidizing the cost of 
domestic production has not been shown to have reduced reliance on 
foreign oil or directly contributed to more efficient resource use or 
domestic productivity. This bill would end these special tax 
treatments.
  Finally, this measure eliminates the special loan program for sugar 
producers and processors, worth $390 million. The federal government is 
burdened with an unnecessary and unprofitable loan program for bug 
sugar producers and enforcing mandated import quotas on foreign sugar. 
Sugar price supports also force consumers to pay $1.4 billion every 
year in artificially inflated sugar prices. This bill simply eliminates 
the taxpayer-funded loan program in 2003 and immediately requires 
repayment of existing loans in case, rather than sugar.
  These tax benefits and subsidies were originally intended to serve a 
limited purpose during times of economic recession and hardship in the 
1970's. Our economy has long since recovered and I believe that these 
subsidies have outlived its purpose. The sunset of these programs will 
end these corporate welfare programs and return any remaining benefit 
back to our Nation's children.
  Mr. President, we all know that one of the most important issues 
facing our nation is the education of our children. Providing a solid, 
quality education for each and every child in our nation is a critical 
component in their quest for personal success and fulfillment. A solid 
education for our children also plays a pivotal role in the success of 
our nation; economically, intellectually, civically and morally.
  We must strive to develop and implement initiatives which strengthen 
and improve our education system thereby ensuring that our children are 
provided with the essential academic tools for succeeding 
professionally, economically and personally. I am sure we all agree 
that increasing the academic performance and skills of all our nation's 
students must be the paramount goal of any education reform we 
implement.
  School vouchers are a viable method of allowing all American children 
access to high quality schools, including

[[Page 19901]]

private and religious schools. Every parent should be able to obtain 
the highest quality education for their children, not just the wealthy. 
Tuition vouchers would finally provide low-income children trapped in 
mediocre, or worse, schools the same educational choices as children of 
economic privilege.
  Some of my colleagues may argue that vouchers would divert money away 
from our nation's public schools and instead of instilling competition 
into our school systems we should be pouring more and more money into 
poor performing public schools. I respectfully disagree. While I 
support strengthening financial support for education in our nation, 
the solution to what ails our system is not simply pouring more and 
more money into it.
  Currently our Nation spends significantly more money than most 
countries and yet our students scored lower than their peers from 
almost all of the forty countries which participated in the last Third 
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS) test. Students in 
countries which are struggling economically, socially and politically, 
such as Russia, outscored U.S. children in math and scored far above 
them in advanced math and physics. Clearly, we must make significant 
changes beyond simply pouring more money into the current structure in 
order to improve our children's academic performance in order to remain 
a viable force in the world economy.
  It is shameful that we are failing to provide many of our children 
with adequate training and quality academic preparation for the real 
world. The number of college freshman who require remedial courses in 
reading, writing and mathematics when they begin their higher education 
is unacceptably high. In fact, presently, more than 30 percent of 
entering freshman need to enroll in one or more remedial course when 
they start college. It does not bode well for our future economy if the 
majority of workers are not prepared with the basic skills to engage in 
a competitive global marketplace.
  I concede that school vouchers are not the magic bullet for 
eradicating all that is wrong with our current educational system, but 
they are an important opportunity for providing improved academic 
opportunities for all children, not just the wealthy. Examination of 
the limited voucher programs scattered around our country reveal high 
levels of parent and student satisfaction, an increase in parental 
involvement, and a definite improvement in attendance and discipline at 
the participating schools. Vouchers encourage public and private 
schools, communities and parents to all work together to raise the 
level of education for all students. Through this bill, we have the 
opportunity to replicate these important attributes throughout all our 
nation's communities.
  Thomas Jefferson said, ``The purpose of education is to create young 
citizens with knowing heads and loving hearts.'' If we fail to give our 
children the education they need to nurture their heads and hearts, 
then we threaten their futures and the future of our nation. Each of us 
is responsible for ensuring that our children have both the love in 
their hearts and the knowledge in their heads to not only dream, but to 
make their dreams a reality.
  The time has come for us to finally conduct a national demonstration 
of school choice to determine the benefits or perhaps disadvantages of 
providing educational choices to all students, not just those who are 
fortunate enough to be born into a wealthy family. I urge my colleagues 
to support this bill and put the needs of America's school children 
ahead of the financial gluttony of big business.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1512

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,
                   TITLE I--EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES

     SEC. 101. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this title are--
       (1) to assist States to--
       (A) give children from low-income families the same choices 
     among all elementary and secondary schools and other academic 
     programs as children from wealthier families already have;
       (B) improve schools and other academic programs by giving 
     parents in low-income families increased consumer power to 
     choose the schools and programs that the parents determine 
     best fit the needs of their children; and
       (C) more fully engage parents in their children's 
     schooling; and
       (2) to demonstrate, through a 3-year national grant 
     program, the effects of a voucher program that gives parents 
     in low-income families--
       (A) choice among public, private, and religious schools for 
     their children; and
       (B) access to the same academic options as parents in 
     wealthy families have for their children.

     SEC. 102. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this title (other than section 110) $1,800,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2003.
       (b) Evaluation.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out section 110 $17,000,000 for fiscal years 2001 
     through 2004.

     SEC. 103. PROGRAM AUTHORITY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall make grants to States, 
     from allotments made under section 104 to enable the States 
     to carry out educational choice programs that provide 
     scholarships, in accordance with this title.
       (b) Limit on Federal Administrative Expenditures.--The 
     Secretary may reserve not more than $1,000,000 of the amounts 
     appropriated under section 102(a) for a fiscal year to pay 
     for the costs of administering this title.

     SEC. 104. ALLOTMENTS TO STATES.

       (a) Allotments.--The Secretary shall make the allotments to 
     States in accordance with a formula specified in regulations 
     issued in accordance with subsection (b). The formula shall 
     provide that the Secretary shall allot to each State an 
     amount that bears the same relationship to the amounts 
     appropriated under section 102(a) for a fiscal year (other 
     than funds reserved under section 103(b)) as the number of 
     covered children in the State bears to the number of covered 
     children in all such States.
       (b) Formula.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue regulations 
     specifying the formula referred to in subsection (a).
       (c) Limit on State Administrative Expenditures.--The State 
     may reserve not more than 1 percent of the funds made 
     available through the State allotment to pay for the costs of 
     administering this title.
       (d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``covered 
     child'' means a child who is enrolled in a public school 
     (including a charter school) that is an elementary school or 
     secondary school.

     SEC. 105. ELIGIBLE SCHOOLS.

       (a) Eligibility.--
       (1) In general.--Schools identified by a State under 
     paragraph (2) shall be considered to be eligible schools 
     under this title.
       (2) Determination.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     the Secretary issues regulations under section 104(b), each 
     State shall identify the public elementary schools and 
     secondary schools in the State that are at or below the 25th 
     percentile for academic performance of schools in the State.
       (b) Performance.--The State shall determine the academic 
     performance of a school under this section based on such 
     criteria as the State may consider to be appropriate.

     SEC. 106. SCHOLARSHIPS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Scholarship awards.--With funds awarded under this 
     title, each State awarded a grant under this title shall 
     provide scholarships to the parents of eligible children, in 
     accordance with subsections (b) and (c). The State shall 
     ensure that the scholarships may be redeemed for elementary 
     or secondary education for the children at any of a broad 
     variety of public and private schools, including religious 
     schools, in the State.
       (2) Scholarship amount.--The amount of each scholarship 
     shall be $2000 per year.
       (3) Tax exemption.--Scholarships awarded under this title 
     shall not be considered income of the parents for Federal 
     income tax purposes or for determining eligibility for any 
     other Federal program.
       (b) Eligible Children.--To be eligible to receive a 
     scholarship under this title, a child shall be--
       (1) a child who is enrolled in a public elementary school 
     or secondary school that is an eligible school; and
       (2) a member of a family with a family income that is not 
     more than 200 percent of the poverty line.
       (c) Award Rules.--
       (1) Priority.--In providing scholarships under this title, 
     the State shall provide scholarships for eligible children 
     through a lottery system administered for all eligible 
     schools in the State by the State educational agency.
       (2) Continuing eligibility.--Each State receiving a grant 
     under this title to carry out an educational choice program 
     shall provide a scholarship in each year of the program to 
     each child who received a scholarship during the previous 
     year of the program, unless--

[[Page 19902]]

       (A) the child no longer resides in the area served by an 
     eligible school;
       (B) the child no longer attends school;
       (C) the child's family income exceeds, by 20 percent or 
     more, 200 percent of the poverty line; or
       (D) the child is expelled or convicted of a felony, 
     including felonious drug possession, possession of a weapon 
     on school grounds, or a violent act against an other student 
     or a member of the school's faculty.

     SEC. 107. USES OF FUNDS.

       Any scholarship awarded under this title for a year shall 
     be used--
       (1) first, for--
       (A) the payment of tuition and fees at the school selected 
     by the parents of the child for whom the scholarship was 
     provided; and
       (B) the reasonable costs of the child's transportation to 
     the school, if the school is not the school to which the 
     child would be assigned in the absence of a program under 
     this title;
       (2) second, if the parents so choose, to obtain 
     supplementary academic services for the child, at a cost of 
     not more than $500, from any provider chosen by the parents, 
     that the State determines is capable of providing such 
     services and has an appropriate refund policy; and
       (3) finally, for educational programs that help the 
     eligible child achieve high levels of academic excellence in 
     the school attended by the eligible child, if the eligible 
     child chooses to attend a public school.

     SEC. 108. STATE REQUIREMENT.

       A State that receives a grant under this title shall allow 
     lawfully operating public and private elementary schools and 
     secondary schools, including religious schools, if any, 
     serving the area involved to participate in the program.

     SEC. 109. EFFECT OF PROGRAMS.

       (a) Title I.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     if a local educational agency in the State would, in the 
     absence of an educational choice program that is funded under 
     this title, provide services to a participating eligible 
     child under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.), the State 
     shall ensure the provision of such services to such child.
       (b) Individuals With Disabilities.--Nothing in this title 
     shall be construed to affect the requirements of part B of 
     the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 
     1411 et seq.).
       (c) Aid.--
       (1) In general.--Scholarships under this title shall be 
     considered to aid families, not institutions. For purposes of 
     determining Federal assistance under Federal law, a parent's 
     expenditure of scholarship funds under this title at a school 
     or for supplementary academic services shall not constitute 
     Federal financial aid or assistance to that school or to the 
     provider of supplementary academic services.
       (2) Supplementary academic services.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a school or 
     provider of supplementary academic services that receives 
     scholarship funds under this title shall, as a condition of 
     participation under this title, comply with the provisions of 
     title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et 
     seq.) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 
     U.S.C. 794).
       (B) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
     regulations to implement the provisions of subparagraph (A), 
     taking into account the purposes of this title and the 
     nature, variety, and missions of schools and providers that 
     may participate in providing services to children under this 
     title.
       (d) Other Federal Funds.--No Federal, State, or local 
     agency may, in any year, take into account Federal funds 
     provided to a State or to the parents of any child under this 
     title in determining whether to provide any other funds from 
     Federal, State, or local resources, or in determining the 
     amount of such assistance, to such State or to a school 
     attended by such child.
       (e) No Discretion.--Nothing in this title shall be 
     construed to authorize the Secretary to exercise any 
     direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, 
     program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any 
     educational institution or school participating in a program 
     under this title.

     SEC. 110. EVALUATION.

       The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct 
     an evaluation of the program authorized by this title. Such 
     evaluation shall, at a minimum--
       (1) assess the implementation of educational choice 
     programs assisted under this title and their effect on 
     participants, schools, and communities in the school 
     districts served, including parental involvement in, and 
     satisfaction with, the program and their children's 
     education;
       (2) compare the educational achievement of participating 
     eligible children with the educational achievement of similar 
     non-participating children before, during, and after the 
     program; and
       (3) compare--
       (A) the educational achievement of eligible children who 
     use scholarships to attend schools other than the schools the 
     children would attend in the absence of the program; with
       (B) the educational achievement of children who attend the 
     schools the children would attend in the absence of the 
     program.

     SEC. 111. ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
     regulations to enforce the provisions of this title.
       (b) Private Cause.--No provision or requirement of this 
     title shall be enforced through a private cause of action.

     SEC. 112. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Charter school.--The term ``charter school'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 10310 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (as redesignated in section 
     3(g) of Public Law 105-278; 112 Stat. 2687).
       (2) Elementary school; local educational agency; parent; 
     secondary school; state educational agency.--The terms 
     ``elementary school'', ``local educational agency'', 
     ``parent'', ``secondary school'', and ``State educational 
     agency'' have the meanings given the terms in section 14101 
     of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 8801).
       (3) Poverty line.--The term ``poverty line'' means the 
     poverty line (as defined by the Office of Management and 
     Budget, and revised annually in accordance with section 
     673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 
     9902(2))) applicable to a family of the size involved.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Education.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States.
                      TITLE II--REVENUE PROVISIONS

     SEC. 201. PHASEOUT OF OIL AND GAS EXPENSING OF DRILLING AND 
                   DEVELOPMENT COSTS.

       Section 263(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: 
     ``This subsection shall not apply to the applicable 
     percentage of costs incurred in taxable years beginning after 
     December 31, 1999. For purposes of the preceding sentence, 
     the applicable percentage for any taxable year shall be 
     determined in accordance with the following table:

The applicable percentage is--ear beginning in--
  2000..........................................................20 ....

  2001..........................................................40 ....

  2002..........................................................60 ....

  2003..........................................................80 ....

  After 2003.................................................100.''....

     SEC. 202. SUNSET OF ALCOHOL FUELS INCENTIVES.

       (a) In General.--The following provisions of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 are each repealed:
       (1) Section 40 (relating to alcohol used as fuel).
       (2) Section 4041(b)(2) (relating to qualified methanol and 
     ethanol).
       (3) Section 4041(k) (relating to fuels containing alcohol).
       (4) Section 4081(c) (relating to taxable fuels mixed with 
     alcohol).
       (5) Section 4091(c) (relating to reduced rate of tax for 
     aviation fuel in alcohol mixture, etc.).
       (6) Section 6427(f) (relating to gasoline, diesel fuel, 
     kerosene, and aviation fuel used to produce certain alcohol 
     fuels).
       (7) The headings 9901.00.50 and 9901.00.52 of the 
     Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (19 U.S.C. 
     3007).
       (b) Effective Date.--The repeals made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 1999.

     SEC. 203. REPEAL OF ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY CREDIT.

       Section 43 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(f) Termination.--In the case of taxable years beginning 
     after December 31, 1999, the enhanced oil recovery credit is 
     zero.''.

     SEC. 204. REPEAL OF UNLIMITED PASSIVE LOSS DEDUCTIONS FOR OIL 
                   AND GAS PROPERTIES.

       Section 469(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     (relating to working interests in oil and gas property) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Termination.--This paragraph shall not apply with 
     respect to any taxable year beginning after December 31, 
     1999.''

     SEC. 205. SUGAR PROGRAM.

       (a) Elimination of Authority To Use Sugar as Collateral for 
     Loans.--Section 156 of the Agricultural Market Transition Act 
     (7 U.S.C. 7272) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by striking ``(d)'' and all that follows through ``A 
     loan under'' and inserting ``(d) Term of Loans.--A loan 
     under'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as 
     paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively, and indenting 
     appropriately;
       (2) by striking subsection (g); and
       (3) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections 
     (g) and (h), respectively.
       (b) Elimination of Sugar Price Support and Production 
     Adjustment Programs.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law--
       (A) a processor of any of the 2003 or subsequent crops of 
     sugarcane or sugar beets shall not be eligible for a loan 
     under any provision of law with respect to the crop; and
       (B) the Secretary of Agriculture may not make price support 
     available, whether in the

[[Page 19903]]

     form of a loan, payment, purchase, or other operation, for 
     any of the 2003 and subsequent crops of sugar beets and 
     sugarcane by using the funds of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation or other funds available to the Secretary.
       (2) Termination of marketing quotas and allotments.--
       (A) In general.--Part VII of subtitle B of title III of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359aa et seq.) 
     is repealed.
       (B) Conforming amendment.--Section 344(f)(2) of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1344(f)(2)) is 
     amended by striking ``sugar cane for sugar, sugar beets for 
     sugar,''.
       (3) General powers.--
       (A) Designated nonbasic agricultural commodities.--Section 
     201(a) of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446(a)) is 
     amended by striking ``milk, sugar beets, and sugarcane'' and 
     inserting ``and milk''.
       (B) Powers of commodity credit corporation.--Section 5(a) 
     of the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 
     714c(a)) is amended by inserting after ``agricultural 
     commodities'' the following: ``(other than sugar)''.
       (C) Section 32 activities.--Section 32 of the Act of August 
     24, 1935 (49 Stat. 774, chapter 641; 7 U.S.C. 612c), is 
     amended in the second sentence of the first paragraph--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``(other than sugar)'' 
     after ``commodities''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``(other than sugar)'' 
     after ``commodity''.
       (4) Transition provisions.--This subsection and the 
     amendments made by this subsection shall not affect the 
     liability of any person under any provision of law as in 
     effect before the application of this subsection and the 
     amendments made by this subsection.
       (5) Crops.--This subsection and the amendments made by this 
     subsection shall apply beginning with the 2003 crop of sugar 
     beets and sugarcane.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. THOMPSON:
  S. 1513. A bill for the relief of Jacqueline Salinas and her children 
Gabriela Salinas, Alejandro Salinas, and Omar Salinas; to the Committee 
on the Judiciary.


                          PRIVATE RELIEF BILL

  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation to 
grant permanent resident status to Gabriela Salinas, 11, her mother 
Jacqueline, and her brothers, Alejandro, 11, and Omar, Jr., 4, all of 
whom currently live in Tennessee. Although I am aware that private 
relief legislation is enacted only in rare cases, I believe that the 
extraordinary circumstances surrounding the Salinas family merit 
consideration of this bill.
  In March of 1996, Gabriela, then seven, and her father Omar Salinas 
left their home in Bolivia and traveled to New York City to seek 
lifesaving treatment at Mt. Sinai Medical Center for Gabriela's rare 
bone cancer, ewing sarcoma. Gabriela, however, was denied treatment at 
Mt. Sinai because her family was unable to afford the $250,000 deposit 
required by the hospital.
  Days later, Gabriela and her father were flown into Memphis, 
Tennessee, for treatment at the internationally renowned St. Jude 
Children's Hospital. Actress Marlo Thomas, whose father founded St. 
Jude, after hearing of the Salinas family's misfortunes, arranged for 
Gabriela to receive pro bono treatment at St. Jude. Shortly after 
Gabriela's chemotherapy treatment began, her mother, Jacqueline, and 
her three siblings joined her and her father in Tennessee. The family 
received an outpouring of sympathy and support from the Memphis 
community and looked forward to returning to Bolivia once Gabriela's 
treatment was completed.
  Tragically, however, on April 14, 1997, prior to the end of 
Gabriela's treatment, Omar and Gabriela's 3-year old sister, Valentina, 
were killed in a car accident on their way back from Washington, D.C. 
to renew their passports. Jacqueline, seven months pregnant at the 
time, was permanently paralyzed from the waist down. This terrible 
tragedy generated national media coverage. As Jacqueline, who gave 
birth to a healthy baby boy two months later, had no other means of 
financial support, St. Jude Hospital generously stepped in to care for 
the family. The hospital, in fact, has made a commitment to provide 
full financial support for Jacqueline and her children to live 
permanently in the United States.
  Because they do not meet the requirements for permanent residence 
under current immigration law, however, the Salinas family will be 
forced to leave the United States following the expiration of their 
tourist visas. Although Jacqueline's son, Danny, nearly two years old, 
is a U.S. citizen, he will not be qualified to sponsor his mother for 
permanent residence until he reaches the age of twenty-one. Despite her 
background in teaching, Jacqueline does not qualify for permanent 
residence under any of the employment-based visa categories. Therefore, 
private relief legislation is the only means by which the family will 
be able to remain permanently in the United States.
  Gabriela and her family have suffered through a long and difficult 
ordeal. Yet, with the compassion, generosity, and support of the people 
of Tennessee and the nation, they have managed to start a new life. The 
family has settled into a new home in Memphis. The children attend 
school in the community. And Gabriela continues to be treated under the 
care of some of the best doctors in the world. With the expiration of 
their tourist visas approaching, it is my hope that we can act soon to 
prevent another tragic setback for the Salinas family. I ask my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 1514. A bill to provide that countries receiving foreign 
assistance be conductive to United States business; to the Committee on 
Foreign Relations.


             THE INTERNATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION ACT OF 1999

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I introduce the International 
Anti-Corruption Act of 1999 to address the growing problem of official 
and unofficial corruption abroad and the direct impact on U.S. 
business. This bill is based on S.1200, which I introduced in the 105th 
Congress.
  As the Co-chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in 
Europe, I intend to address this growing problem of corruption. Last 
month, I chaired a Commission hearing that focused on the issues of 
bribery and corruption in the OSCE region, an area stretching from 
Vancouver to Vladivostok. The Commission heard that, in economic terms, 
rampant corruption and organized crime in this vast region has cost 
U.S. businesses billions of dollars in lost contracts with direct 
implications for our economy.
  Ironically, Mr. President, in some of the biggest recipients of U.S. 
foreign assistance--countries like Russia and Ukraine--the climate is 
either not conducive or outright hostile to American business. Last 
month, I also attended the annual session of the OSCE Parliamentary 
Assembly in St. Petersburg, Russia, where I had an opportunity to sit 
down with U.S. business representatives to learn, first-hand, the 
obstacles they face.
  Mr. President, the time has come to stop providing aid as usual to 
those countries which line up to receive our assistance, only to turn 
around and fleece U.S. businesses conducting legitimate operations in 
these countries. For this reason, I am introducing the International 
Anti-Corruption Act of 1999 to require the State Department to submit a 
report and the President to certify by March 1 of each year that 
countries which are receiving U.S. foreign aid are, in fact, conducive 
to American businesses and investors. If a country is found to be 
hostile to American businesses, aid from the United States would be cut 
off. The certification would be specifically based on whether a country 
is making progress in, and is committed to, economic reform aimed at 
eliminating corruption.
  Under my bill, if the President certifies that a country's business 
climate is not conducive for U.S. businesses, that country will, in 
effect, be put on probation. The country would continue to receive U.S. 
foreign aid through the end of the fiscal year, but aid would be cut 
off on the first day of the next fiscal year unless the President 
certifies the country is making significant progress in implementing 
the specified economic indicators and is committed to recognizing the 
involvement of U.S. business.
  My bill also includes the customary waiver authority where the 
national interests of the United States are at stake. For countries 
certified as hostile

[[Page 19904]]

to or not conducive for U.S. business, aid can continue if the 
President determines it is in the national security interest of the 
United States. However, the determination expires after 6 months unless 
the President determines its continuation is important to our national 
security interest.
  I also included a provision which would allow aid to continue to meet 
urgent humanitarian needs, including food, medicine, disaster and 
refugee relief, to support democratic political reform and rule of law 
activities, and to create private sector and nongovernmental 
organizations that are independent of government control, or to develop 
a free market economic system.
  Mr. President, instead of jumping on the bandwagon to pump millions 
of additional tax dollars into countries which are hostile to U.S. 
businesses and investors, we should be working to root out the kinds of 
bribery and corruption that have an overall chilling effect on much 
needed foreign investment. Left unchecked, such corruption will 
continue to undermine fledgling democracies worldwide and further 
impede moves toward a genuine free market economy. I believe the 
legislation I am introducing today is a critical step this direction, 
and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.
  I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1514

       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 ``International Anti-
     Corruption Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON FOREIGN ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Report and Certification.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than March 1 of each year, the 
     President shall submit to the appropriate committees a 
     certification described in paragraph (2) and a report for 
     each country that received foreign assistance under part I of 
     the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 during the fiscal year. 
     The report shall describe the extent to which each such 
     country is making progress with respect to the following 
     economic indicators:
       (A) Implementation of comprehensive economic reform, based 
     on market principles, private ownership, equitable treatment 
     of foreign private investment, adoption of a legal and policy 
     framework necessary for such reform, protection of 
     intellectual property rights, and respect for contracts.
       (B) Elimination of corrupt trade practices by private 
     persons and government officials.
       (C) Moving toward integration into the world economy.
       (2) Certification.--The certification described in this 
     paragraph means a certification as to whether, based on the 
     economic indicators described in subparagraphs (A) through 
     (C) of paragraph (1), each country is--
       (A) conducive to United States business;
       (B) not conducive to United States business; or
       (C) hostile to United States business.
       (b) Limitations on Assistance.--
       (1) Countries hostile to united states business.--
       (A) General limitation.--Beginning on the date the 
     certification described in subsection (a) is submitted--
       (i) none of the funds made available for assistance under 
     part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (including 
     unobligated balances of prior appropriations) may be made 
     available for the government of a country that is certified 
     as hostile to United States business pursuant to such 
     subsection (a); and
       (ii) the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the 
     United States Executive Director of each multilateral 
     development bank to vote against any loan or other 
     utilization of the funds of such institution to or by any 
     country with respect to which a certification described in 
     clause (i) has been made.
       (B) Duration of limitations.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (c), the limitations described in clauses (i) and 
     (ii) of subparagraph (A) shall apply with respect to a 
     country that is certified as hostile to United States 
     business pursuant to subsection (a) until the President 
     certifies to the appropriate committees that the country is 
     making significant progress in implementing the economic 
     indicators described in subsection (a)(1) and is no longer 
     hostile to United States business.
       (2) Countries not conducive to united states business.--
       (A) Probationary period.--A country that is certified as 
     not conducive to United States business pursuant to 
     subsection (a), shall be considered to be on probation 
     beginning on the date of such certification.
       (B) Required improvement.--Unless the President certifies 
     to the appropriate committees that the country is making 
     significant progress in implementing the economic indicators 
     described in subsection (a) and is committed to being 
     conducive to United States business, beginning on the first 
     day of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which a 
     country is certified as not conducive to United States 
     business pursuant to subsection (a)(2)--
       (i) none of the funds made available for assistance under 
     part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (including 
     unobligated balances of prior appropriations) may be made 
     available for the government of such country; and
       (ii) the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the 
     United States Executive Director of each multilateral 
     development bank to vote against any loan or other 
     utilization of the funds of such institution to or by any 
     country with respect to which a certification described in 
     subparagraph (A) has been made.
       (C) Duration of limitations.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (c), the limitations described in clauses (i) and 
     (ii) of subparagraph (B) shall apply with respect to a 
     country that is certified as not conducive to United States 
     business pursuant to subsection (a) until the President 
     certifies to the appropriate committees that the country is 
     making significant progress in implementing the economic 
     indicators described in subsection (a)(1) and is conducive to 
     United States business.
       (c) Exceptions.--
       (1) National security interest.--Subsection (b) shall not 
     apply with respect to a country described in subsection (b) 
     (1) or (2) if the President determines with respect to such 
     country that making such funds available is important to the 
     national security interest of the United States. Any such 
     determination shall cease to be effective 6 months after 
     being made unless the President determines that its 
     continuation is important to the national security interest 
     of the United States.
       (2) Other exceptions.--Subsection (b) shall not apply with 
     respect to--
       (A) assistance to meet urgent humanitarian needs (including 
     providing food, medicine, disaster, and refugee relief);
       (B) democratic political reform and rule of law activities;
       (C) the creation of private sector and nongovernmental 
     organizations that are independent of government control; and
       (D) the development of a free market economic system.

     SEC. 3. TOLL-FREE NUMBER.

       The Secretary of Commerce shall make available a toll-free 
     telephone number for reporting by members of the public and 
     United States businesses on the progress that countries 
     receiving foreign assistance are making in implementing the 
     economic indicators described in section 2(a)(1). The 
     information obtained from the toll-free telephone reporting 
     shall be included in the report required by section 2(a).

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Appropriate committees.--The term ``appropriate 
     committees'' means the Committee on International Relations 
     of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations of the Senate.
       (2) Multilateral development bank.--The term ``multilateral 
     development bank'' means the International Bank for 
     Reconstruction and Development, the International Development 
     Association, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Campbell, Mr. 
        Bingaman, and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 1515. A bill to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
pensions.


         radiation exposure compensation act amendments of 1999

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the ``Radiation 
Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 1999,'' known as RECAA 1999. I 
am pleased to be joined by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell; the 
distinguished Senate Minority Leader, Senator Tom Daschle; Senator Jeff 
Bingaman; and Senator Pete Domenici in introducing this legislation.
  These long awaited amendments will ensure that the United States 
government meets its responsibility to provide fair and compassionate 
compensation to the thousands of individuals adversely affected by the 
mining of uranium and from fallout during the testing of nuclear 
weapons in the early post-war years. These citizens helped our nation 
during the Cold War and we must not forget them.
  In 1990, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210) was 
enacted. RECA, which I was proud to sponsor, affirmed the 
responsibility of the federal government to compensate

[[Page 19905]]

individuals who were harmed by the radioactive fallout from atomic 
testing, for which the government took few precautions to ensure 
safety. Additionally, workers who have suffered long-term health 
problems because they were not adequately informed of the dangers faced 
during uranium mining were eligible for compensation under the act.
  Administered through the Department of Justice, RECA has been 
responsible for compensating approximately 6,000 individuals for their 
injuries, but we can and should help a lot more. While the passage of 
the 1990 law was a momentous event, I have been carefully monitoring 
the implementation of the RECA program.
  I am disturbed over numerous reports from my Utah constituents 
concerning the burdensome process of filing claims with the Department 
of Justice. One complaint which I hear far too often is ``that it is 
easier to compensate a dead miner, than one living with disease.'' We 
cannot let this injustice continue. We have drafted the RECA Amendments 
of 1999 in response to these concerns.
  We should not add a bureaucratic nightmare to the burden of disease 
and ill-health already carried by these citizens. Moreover, excessive 
regulatory hurdles have made it too difficult for some deserving 
individuals to be fairly compensated under the Act. We must streamline 
and speed up the application process. In addition, advances in our 
medical knowledge compel us to modify the 1990 Act to define better 
criteria for compensation and to include diseases that we now know have 
radiogenic causes.
  Let me explain how this bill was developed. RECA originally defined a 
list of 13 compensable diseases based upon the 1988 Radiation Exposed 
Veterans Compensation Act and the findings of the 1980 report of the 
Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations (BEIR-III). 
In 1992, REVCA was amended based upon the findings of an updated BEIR-
IV and -V Reports which defined a host of cancers that are considered 
for disability compensation due to radiation exposure.
  In addition, the report of the President's Advisory Committee on 
Human Radiation Experiments, released in 1995, provides further 
scientific evidence for changes in the 1990 RECA law. The Committee 
reviewed 125 current studies and more than 200 public witnesses in 
evaluating the risks and diseases caused by exposure to radiation 
conducted in the Cold War period. The conclusions of the advisory 
committee report support the reduction in radiation level exposure, the 
elimination of distinction between smokers and nonsmokers for lung 
cancer, and the inclusion of other radiogenic diseases.
  Based on the evidence in both the President's Advisory Committee and 
the BEIR-V Committee Reports, we have extended the number of eligible 
radiogenic pathologies by six to include: lung, brain, colon, ovary, 
bladder, and salivary gland cancers. In addition, specific non-cancer 
diseases, such as silicosis, have been incorporated. Adding these 
diseases, which have been documented by science as linked to radiation 
exposure, will more fairly compensate our fellow citizens who were 
exposed to this danger so long ago.
  With the inclusion of these modifications, miners, millers, and 
uranium ore transporters will be eligible in 11 western states to seek 
equitable compensation for their sacrifice in our nation's effort to 
produce our nuclear defense arsenal. I have worked with Senators 
Daschle, Campbell, and Bingaman in reviewing Atomic Energy Commission 
records to document the uranium/vanadium mines supported by the U.S. 
government during and after the Manhattan Project. Eleven western 
states were found to have mines dating from 1947 through 1970 from 
which the U.S. government purchased radioactive ore.
  Furthermore, uranium mills in these areas testify to the need to 
include millers who were exposed to radioactive decay without the 
benefit of state or government-instituted safety precautions. The 
report ``Raw Materials Activities of the Manhattan Project on the 
Colorado Plateau,'' by William Chenoweth, a noted geologist, documents 
the tragedies of exposure endured by miners, millers, and ore 
transporters as they extracted, prepared and moved the radioactive ore 
for use in the nuclear arsenal. These changes would enable an estimated 
6,000 individuals harmed by exposure to uranium radiation to seek 
compensation.
  Of the thousands affected by radiation exposure, many of the 
downwinders, miners and millers were members of Indian tribes. 
Particularly noteworthy was the large number of U.S. atomic energy 
mines on Native American reservations. Many of these miners were not 
aware of the dangers that radiation exposure can cause, and the 
government did little to inform them of the risks. After RECA 1990 was 
passed into law, many complications have hindered members of Indian 
tribes from seeking their compensation. In working with the members of 
the Navajo Nation and other Native American tribes, we have developed 
legislation that largely addresses their concerns. The bill also 
instructs the Attorney General to take into account and make 
appropriate allowances for the laws, traditions, and customs of Indian 
tribes.
  Finally, my bill also contains a grant program designed to provide 
for the early detection, prevention and education on radiogenic 
diseases. These programs will screen for the early warning signs of 
cancer, provide medical referrals, educate individuals on radiogenic 
cancers as well as prevention, and facilitate documentation of RECA 
claims. These grants will be available to a wide range of health care 
providers including: cancer centers, hospitals, Veterans Affairs 
medical centers, community health centers, and state departments of 
health.
  Some may question the cost of our legislation. Let me set the record 
straight. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill will 
cost close to $1 billion over the next 21 years. That averages out to 
just over $47 million a year. This estimate is significantly lower than 
other proposals that have been considered by Congress over the past 
several years. Ours is, I believe, a common sense approach that keeps 
to the intent of the original statute.
  But, Mr. President, in considering the cost, it is important to 
remember what prompted the original statute. What justified this 
compensation program in the first place? The answer is that the federal 
government during the early years of the atomic testing program, 
exposed American citizens--our neighbors--to deadly nuclear fallout. 
Knowing that there would be adverse effects of exposure to fallout, the 
government exploded these bombs so that the fallout would blow 
``downwind'' of the more heavily populated cities. There was no warning 
or instruction about minimizing exposure for the citizens in these 
rural areas. In my view, Mr. President, this bill is only fair and 
just. If we fail to provide even basic compensation for the hardships 
they have endured, we will still be taking them for granted.
  I ask my colleagues to join me and Senators Daschle, Campbell, 
Bingaman, and Domenici in meeting our nation's commitment to the 
thousands of individuals who were victims of radiation exposure while 
supporting our country's national defense. I believe we have an 
obligation to care for those who were injured, especially since, at the 
time, they were not adequately warned about the potential health 
hazards involved with their work. Now is our chance to compensate these 
men and women for their injuries. I urge my colleagues to support these 
Americans by cosponsoring the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act 
Amendments of 1999.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am delighted to join in the 
introduction of the ``Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 
1999.'' For the last year, I have been working to extend the benefits 
of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) to South Dakotans who 
worked in uranium mines and a uranium mill in western South Dakota. 
This legislation would accomplish that goal, and I am very grateful to 
Senator Hatch for his hard work on this issue.

[[Page 19906]]

  In the 9 years since the passage of RECA, we have had time to reflect 
upon its strengths and its shortcomings. During that time, it has 
become overwhelmingly clear that we have not fully met our obligation 
to victims of our nuclear program. Most seriously, we have arbitrarily 
and unfairly limited compensation for underground miners to those in 
only five States, despite the fact that underground miners in other 
states such as South Dakota faced exactly the same risk to their 
health. This fact alone requires us to amend RECA so that we can right 
this wrong.
  However, we have also excluded other groups of workers, and their 
surviving families, from compensation for serious health problems and, 
in some cases, deaths, that have resulted from their work to help 
defend our Nation. Many of those who worked in uranium mills have 
developed serious respiratory problems as a result of exposure to 
uranium dusts and silica. Similar concerns have been raised about 
above-ground miners and uranium transportation workers as well.
  This legislation would address those shortcomings and ensure that 
those who have suffered health problems because the government failed 
to warn them about the hazards of working with uranium are compensated. 
It is my hope that Congress will act on it this session so that we can 
provide compensation to these workers as quickly as possible.
  There is one issue I hope we can address when this bill is considered 
in committee. Earlier this summer, I hosted a meeting of former uranium 
workers in Edgemont, SD. The most pressing concern of many of them was 
their inability to purchase affordable, quality health insurance due to 
the serious, ongoing health problems many of them have as a result of 
their work. Even if compensated by the Federal Government, they fear 
they are only one hospital stay away from bankruptcy. I hope that I can 
work with my colleagues over the next several months to determine how 
we can ensure that these workers, who sacrificed their health for their 
country, have access to affordable health insurance.
  Finally, I have noted in the past the difficulty of tracking down 
documentation about South Dakota's uranium mining and milling 
activities. For that reason, I ask unanimous consent that a letter from 
the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources and a 
letter from the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology on this 
issue be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                         Department of Environment


                                        and Natural Resources,

                                     Pierre, SD, January 26, 1999.
     Hon. Tom Daschle,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Daschle: Peter Hanson of your office requested 
     that this letter be sent to you regarding past uranium mining 
     activities in South Dakota. Both underground and surface 
     uranium mining activities took place in South Dakota a few 
     decades ago. While we can confirm that these activities took 
     place, it is important to point out that South Dakota did not 
     have a mining regulatory program during the years uranium 
     mining took place. Therefore, there are no detailed records 
     or statistical information in our files. Certain staff 
     members have mainly collected the documents in our office as 
     a result of interest in the subject. The information below is 
     excerpted from some of these documents.
       Uranium deposits of economic significance were discovered 
     in 1951 in Fall River County, South Dakota, in what became 
     know as the Edgemont mining district. Prospecting quickly 
     intensified and by 1953 production of uranium ore increased 
     to the point that the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 
     established a buying station in Edgemont. In 1956, a mill for 
     processing uranium ore was completed in Edgemont. Commercial 
     uranium deposits were also discovered in lignite beds of 
     Harding County in 1954.
       According to our records, including Mullen and Agnew (1959) 
     and Bieniewski and Agnew (1964), production of uranium ore 
     occurred in Fall River and Harding Counties, as well as some 
     production in Custer, Lawrence, and Pennington Counties (and 
     an ``unknown'' county).
       The number of producing properties varied through the 
     years. Bieniewski and McGregor (1965) indicate that in 1963 
     production of uranium ore was attributed to 37 operations, 19 
     of which were in Fall River County, 14 in Harding County, 3 
     in Custer County, and 1 in Pennington County. Production of 
     ore reached a peak in 1964 (with 110,147 short tons of 
     uranium ore produced) and then declined greatly in the late 
     1960's (USGS, 1975 and Stotelmeyer, et al., 1966). According 
     to Stotelmeyer, et al. (1967), it appears that there were 49 
     uranium mining operations in 1964, 29 of which were in Fall 
     River County, 15 in Harding County, and 5 in Custer County.
       The mill at Edgemont stopped producing uranium concentrates 
     in 1972. By the end of 1973, nearly one million tons of 
     uranium ore containing about 3,200,000 pounds of 
     U3O8 were produced from deposits in 
     South Dakota (USGS, 1975).
       Our records are very sketchy regarding the number of 
     uranium mine employees. Bieniewski and Agnew (1964) indicate 
     that the average number of men employed in uranium mines and 
     mills in 1961 was 104, excluding officeworkers. A total of 
     204,216 man-hours were worked in 1961. There were 23 uranium 
     mine and mill operations that year. There were 10 nonfatal 
     injuries in 1961, which equated to a frequency rate of 49 
     injuries per million man-hours (Bieniewski and Agnew, 1964).
       In 1962, preliminary figures indicated that the average 
     number of men employed was 103. A total of 202,062 man-hours 
     were worked in 1962. There were 20 operations that year. 
     There were 16 nonfatal injuries in 1962, which equated to a 
     frequency rate of 79.1 injuries per million man-hours 
     (Bieniewski and Agnew, 1964).
       We were unable to locate uranium employment statistics for 
     other years. I wouldn't be surprised if there were more 
     uranium mine employees in other years than those referenced 
     in the 1961-1962 statistics above, such as during the peak 
     production year of 1964.
       We have provided Peter Hanson with some information and 
     references on the subject. Among other things, that 
     information includes reference citations to several 
     documents, publications, and maps that refer to uranium 
     mining and uranium deposits in South Dakota, some of which 
     are referenced here. We also sent the web address of our 
     department's web page on Inactive and Abandoned Mines in the 
     Black Hills http://www.state.sd.us/denr/DES/mining/
acidmine.htm
       The names of some of the uranium mines are shown on the 
     maps referred to above. If you would like copies of these 
     maps, or of any of the other documents cited in the 
     information sent to Mr. Hanson, please let us know.
       You may wish to contact Dr. Arden Davis and Dr. Kate Webb 
     at the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology for 
     further information on uranium mining and abandoned uranium 
     mines in South Dakota.
       If you have any questions or need further assistance, 
     please contact Tom Durkin with the Minerals and Mining 
     Program at 605-773-4201.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Nettie H. Myers,
     Secretary.
                                  ____

                                            South Dakota School of


                                         Mines and Technology,

                                  Rapid City, SD, January 8, 1999.
     Senator Tom Daschle, 
     Senate Hart Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Daschle: This letter is to provide a brief 
     background on uranium mining in South Dakota as well as 
     documentation of underground uranium mining activity within 
     the state. Mr. Peter Hanson of your office contacted us 
     earlier this week about this subject. Dr. Cathleen Webb and I 
     have conducted inventories of abandoned mines in the Black 
     Hills area for the U.S. Forest Service and for the South 
     Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, so we 
     are familiar with uranium mines in the western part of the 
     state.
       Uranium deposits were discovered in the southern Black 
     Hills of South Dakota in 1951. By 1953, the former U.S. 
     Atomic Energy Commission had established a station at 
     Edgemont in Fall River County. A mill for processing uranium 
     in Edgemont was completed in 1956. This mill served open-pit 
     and underground mining operations in the southern Black Hills 
     area. Uranium also was mined in Harding County, South Dakota.
       Production of uranium ore in South Dakota reached its peak 
     in 1964, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. In the late 
     1960's, production declined after federal price supports were 
     eliminated and supply exceeded demand. The mill at Edgemont 
     ceased production of uranium concentrates in 1972 and was de-
     commissioned in the 1980's. Most uranium mines in the Black 
     Hills have been inactive or abandoned since the late 1960's 
     or early 1970's.
       Information from the former U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 
     and the U.S. Geological Survey shows that nearly one million 
     tons of uranium ore were mined in South Dakota from 1953 to 
     1972. More than one hundred mines operated at one time or 
     another in the

[[Page 19907]]

     Edgemont area, although in some cases several claims were 
     consolidated later into a single mine. Much of the mining was 
     from open pits, but at least 22 mines had underground 
     workings. These mines are listed below. Photographs of some 
     of these mine openings are reproduced on an enclosed page.
       We hope this information will be helpful. If you have any 
     questions, please feel free to contact us.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Arden D. Davis,
                              Professor of Geological Engineering.
                                                 Cathleen J. Webb,
                                 Associate Professor of Chemistry.

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Today I join my colleague, Senator Hatch, in 
introducing the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 1999. 
These amendments, which are desperately needed, will help to provide 
much needed relief and assistance to many victims of uranium exposure 
and make this Act more consistent with current medical knowledge.
  From 1946 to 1971, the United States purchased domestically-mined 
uranium for our nuclear weapons arsenal. Many of these mines were 
located in western Colorado, affecting citizens in my state. With the 
uranium mined there, in my colleague's state of Utah and throughout the 
western United States, we were able to develop vast stores of nuclear 
weapons, which were the key to our national security. The cold war 
demanded that we keep producing these weapons in order to keep up with, 
and defend ourselves against, the former Soviet Union. It was not until 
many years later that scientists began to realize that, ironically, the 
uranium we were mining to help create weapons to protect us in a 
nuclear war, was actually killing those men who mined it. Also harmed 
were those brave men and women who participated in atmospheric tests of 
the weapons armed with the uranium.
  By 1971, the Atomic Energy Commission had put in place, and fully 
implemented, ventilation and safety procedures which greatly reduced 
the threat of radiation exposure. But for those miners and test-site 
participants who were involved in the atomic weapons program in the 
years before the changes, there was little more available for them than 
a kind word and pat on the back as they developed cancer and other 
diseases.
  In 1990, we took steps to change the way we treated these victims. I 
cosponsored a measure in the House which allowed victims of certain 
types of radiation exposure to file claims with the Department of 
Justice and collect up to $100,000 in damages. It was the first step 
toward acknowledging the unknown sacrifice many of those miners and 
test participants made to win the cold war.
  With the passage of the law, the Committee on the Biological Effects 
of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) began further researching the health 
effects of radiation exposure. Their studies have revealed that several 
other types of cancer and nonmalignant respiratory diseases are caused 
by exposure to radiation, in addition to those listed in the original 
act. Furthermore, the BEIR Committee has discovered that many of the 
factors we thought contributed to cancer, such as coffee consumption, 
actually have no effect. Additionally, the unnecessarily long length of 
exposure, sometimes as high as 500 working level months, was determined 
by experts to be excessive and difficult to accurately measure and 
prove. The findings of the BEIR Committee have led us to seek to update 
the original law, with the advice and input of many experts in the 
health and mining fields, by amending the act with the latest 
scientific research.
  It's time to finish what we started in the 1990 act. These victims 
need to be treated fairly and receive adequate care. We also owe it to 
the other people who worked with uranium to continue studying the 
effects of their contribution on their health. That's why this bill 
expands coverage to other uranium victims and establishes grant 
programs for education and the prevention and early detection of 
radiogenic diseases.
  I ask my colleagues to join us today in making good on our promise to 
these people who so dutifully served their nation.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today as a co-sponsor of this 
important bill to make some much needed changes to the Radiation 
Exposure Compensation Act. I am pleased to join my colleagues, 
including the chairmen of the Senate Judiciary and Indian Affairs 
Committees, in support of this legislation.
  Mr. President, my home state of New Mexico is the birthplace of the 
atomic bomb. New Mexico's national laboratories have long been involved 
in developing and testing nuclear weapons. One of the unfortunate 
consequences of our country's rapid development of its nuclear arsenal 
was that many of those who worked in the earliest uranium mines, prior 
to the implementation of government health and safety standards in 
1971, became afflicted with terrible illnesses.
  I began to notice this problem more than 20 years ago, when I learned 
that miners had contracted an alarmingly high rate of lung cancer and 
other diseases commonly related to radiation exposure.
  Many of the miners native Americans, mostly members of the Navajo 
Nation, with whom the U.S. Government has had a longstanding trust 
relationship based on the treaties and agreements between our country 
and the tribes. Some 1,500 Navajos worked in the uranium mines from 
1947 to 1971. Many of them have since died of radiation-related 
illnesses.
  All of the uranium miners, including the Navajos, performed a great 
service out of patriotic duty to this country. Their work helped us to 
win the cold war. Unfortunately, our Nation failed to fulfill its duty 
to protect the miners' health and some 20 years ago, I began the effort 
to see that the miners and their families received just compensation 
for their illnesses.
  In 1978, in the 95th Congress, I introduced the first bill to 
compensate uranium miners who contracted radiation-related diseases. 
The bill was called the Uranium Miners Compensation Act, and it was the 
predecessor to the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) which is 
law today.
  The following year in 1979, I held the first field hearing on this 
issue in Grants, NM, to learn about the concerns and the health 
problems faced by uranium miners. In later years, I traveled to 
Shiprock, NM, and the Navajo Nation Indian Reservation to gather more 
information about the uranium mines and their families.
  Twelve years after I introduced that first bill, President Bush 
signed RECA into law. At the time, RECA was intended to provide fair 
and swift compensation for those miners and downwinders who had 
contracted certain radiation-related illnesses.
  Since the RECA trust fund began making awards in 1992, the Department 
of Justice has approved a total 3,135 claims valued at nearly $232 
million. In my home state of New Mexico, there have been 371 claims 
approved with a value of nearly $37 million. For that work, the 
Department of Justice is to be commended.
  The original RECA was a compassionate law which unfortunately has 
come to be administered in a bureaucratic, dispassionate and often 
unfair manner. Many claims have languished at the Department of Justice 
for far too long.
  Miners and their families, particularly Navajos, often have waited 
many years for their claims to be processed. Many claims were denied 
because the miners were smokers and could not prove that their diseases 
were related solely to uranium mining. In other cases, miners faced 
problems establishing the requisite amount of working level months 
needed to make a successful claim. Native American claims by spousal 
survivors often were denied because of difficulties associated with 
documenting native American marriages.
  This bill makes some important, common sense changes to the radiation 
compensation program to address the problems I have outlined. First, it 
expands the list of compensable diseases to include new cancers, 
including leukemia, thyroid, and brain cancer. It also includes certain 
noncancer diseases, including pulmonary fibrosis. Medical science has 
been able to link these diseases to uranium mining in the 10 years 
since the enactment of the

[[Page 19908]]

original RECA. We now know that prolonged radiation exposure can cause 
many additional diseases. This bill uses the best available science to 
make sure that those who were injured by radiation exposure are 
compensated.
  The bill also extends eligibility to above-ground and open-pit 
miners, millers and transport workers. The latest science tells us that 
the risks of disease associated with radiation exposure were not 
necessarily limited to those who worked in unventilated mines.
  Most importantly, the bill requires the Department of Justice to take 
native American law and customs into account when deciding claims. I 
have heard countless stories about the inequities faced by the spouses 
of Navajo miners who have been unable to successfully document their 
traditional tribal marriages to the satisfaction of the Justice 
Department under current law and regulations. This bill will change 
that, and make it easier for spousal survivors to make successful 
claims.
  Mr. President, I am pleased to co-sponsor this important legislation. 
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill will cost close 
to $1 billion over the next 21 years. That is far less than some of the 
other proposals floated in the House and Senate during the past few 
years. This is a commonsense approach, which addresses many of the 
problems with the existing program, without unnecessarily expanding the 
scope of the Radiation Exposure compensation Act. The chairman of the 
Senate Judiciary Committee has done a fine job crafting this bill and I 
have been pleased to work with him in that regard. I look forward to 
helping move this bill through the Senate.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. THOMPSON (for himself and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 1516. A bill to amend title III of the Stewart B. McKinney 
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11331 et seq.) to reauthorize the 
Federal Emergency Management Food and Shelter Program, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.


   LEGISLATION TO RE-AUTHORIZE THE EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER PROGRAM

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I am proud to join Chairman Thompson in 
introducing a bill that will re-authorize a small but highly effective 
program, the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, or EFS for short. The 
EFS program, which is administered by the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency, supplements community efforts to meet the needs of the homeless 
and hungry in all fifty states. I am pleased that my friend, Chairman 
Thompson, is sponsoring this legislation. Our Committee on Governmental 
Affairs has jurisdiction over the EFS program, and it is my hope that 
together we can generate even more bipartisan support for a program 
that makes a real difference with its tiny budget. The EFS program is a 
great help not only to the Nation's homeless population but also to 
working people who are trying to feed and shelter their families at 
entry-level wages. Services supplemented by the EFS funding, such as 
food banks and emergency rent/utility assistance programs, are 
especially helpful to families with big responsibilities but small 
paychecks.
  One of the things that distinguishes the EFS program is the extent to 
which it relies on non-profit organizations. Local boards in counties, 
parishes, and municipalities across the country advertise the 
availability of funds, decide on non-profit and local government 
agencies to be funded, and monitor the recipient agencies. The local 
boards, like the program's National Board, are made up of charitable 
organizations including the National Council of Churches, the United 
Jewish Communities, Catholic Charities, USA, the Salvation Army, and 
the American Red Cross. By relying on community participation, the 
program keeps administrative overhead to an unusually low amount, less 
than 3%.
  The EFS program has operated without authorization since 1994 but has 
been sustained by annual appropriations. The proposed bill will re-
authorize the program for the next three years. It will also authorize 
modest funding increases over the amounts appropriated in recent years. 
From 1990 the EFS program was funded at approximately $130 million 
annually, but that number was cut back by appropriators in fiscal year 
1996 and has held steady at $100 million since then. Creeping inflation 
has taken an additional bite: $130 million in 1990 dollars is 
equivalent to $165.6 million today. The draft legislation will 
authorize increases to $125 million in the coming fiscal year and an 
additional five million dollars each of the following two years. 
Although the increases will not bring the program's funding up to its 
previous levels, they will provide additional aid to community-based 
organizations struggling to meet the needs of the homeless and working 
poor in an era of steep budget cuts.
  In summary, Mr. President, FEMA's Emergency Food and Shelter Program 
is a highly efficient example of the government relying on the 
country's non-profit organizations to help people in innovative ways. 
The EFS program aids the homeless and the hungry in a majority of the 
nation's counties and in all fifty states, and I ask my colleagues to 
support this program and our re-authorizing legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill war order to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1516

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

     SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 322 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 11352) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 322. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2000, $130,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2001, and $135,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.''.

     SEC. 2. NAME CHANGE TO NOMINATING ORGANIZATION.

       Section 301(b) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11331(b)) is amended by striking 
     paragraph (5) and inserting the following:
       ``(5) United Jewish Communities.''.

     SEC. 3. PARTICIPATION OF HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS ON LOCAL 
                   BOARDS.

       Section 316(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11346(a)) is amended by striking 
     paragraph (6) and inserting the following:
       ``(6) guidelines requiring each local board to include in 
     their membership not less than 1 homeless individual, former 
     homeless individual, homeless advocate, or recipient of food 
     or shelter services, except that such guidelines may waive 
     such requirement for any board unable to meet such 
     requirement if the board otherwise consults with homeless 
     individuals, former homeless individuals, homeless advocates, 
     or recipients of food or shelter services.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD:
  S. 1517. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have continued access under current 
contracts to managed health care by extending the Medicare cost 
contract program for 3 years.


                the medicare cost contract extension act

 Mr. Allard. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to 
introduce the Medicare Managed Care Cost Contract Extension Act of 
1999.
  The Medicare Program traditionally offers participating HMOs two 
contracts to choose from: Medicare risk (Medicare+Choice) and Medicare 
cost. In an effort to expand and refine the Medicare+Choice program, 
Section 4002 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 terminates the Medicare 
cost contract program effective December 31, 2002. This termination of 
cost contracts will leave two options for a Medicare recipient, that of 
traditional Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare+Choice.
  As of June of this year 358,658 Americans receive Medicare HMO 
service through Medicare cost contracts. The vast majority of these 
Americans live in rural areas where there are no Medicare+Choice 
options. In my house state of Colorado, 97 percent of Medicare cost 
contracting beneficiaries live in a county that does not currently have 
another Medicare HMO option. If the intention of the Balanced Budget 
Act and Medicare+Choice is to provide a standard, reliable option to 
Medicare fee-for-service coverage it has not yet

[[Page 19909]]

accomplished this in rural areas. It appears to me that until 
Medicare+Choice coverage is available to rural cost contract recipients 
Congress should re-consider this sunset.
  While I agree with the wisdom of the Balanced Budget Act, we have 
discovered a number of areas where the Act has not produced the results 
that Congress intended. As well meaning as the sunset provision for 
cost contracts may have been, I am confident that Congress has no 
intention of leaving rural Americans without a choice in their Medicare 
coverage.
  The legislation I am introducing will postpone the sunset date by 
three years to December 31, 2005. I believe that this extension 
accomplishes a number of things consistent with the Balanced Budget Act 
as it concerns cost contracting.
  The Medicare Managed Care Cost Contract Extension Act of 1999 will 
not change current requirement that the Health Care Financing 
Administration produce a study on the impact of cost contracting 
termination. This study is currently due in January 2001. I think it is 
important that this report be delivered to Congress while there is 
still time to establish a permanent extension or another sensible 
solution that will maintain choice for Medicare recipients.
  As we have seen in my home state of Colorado, Medicare+Choice options 
have not developed in rural areas currently served by Medicare cost 
contractors. The Balanced Budget Act may have intended to replace cost 
contracting services with Medicare+Choice options, but these options 
are not yet available. I believe it would be irresponsible to continue 
to move cost contract beneficiaries toward an option that is 
unavailable. If Medicare+Choice can effectively serve rural areas they 
should have time to establish themselves. Based on current trends in 
rural health care I do not believe that Medicare+Choice will be a 
viable option in 2002, and perhaps not any time in the foreseeable 
future.
  I believe that Medicare beneficiaries deserve a choice in how they 
receive their health care, and for a few people in our nation the only 
nation to Medicare fee-for-service is through a cost contract. I hope 
that as we consider various proposals for Medicare reform that we will 
consider the 358,658 Americans who are facing the elimination of the 
Medicare option they chose to provide their health care.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAYH:
  S. 1519. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
that certain educational benefits provided by an employer to children 
of employees shall be from gross income as a scholarship; to the 
Committee on Small Business.


              EDUCATIONAL TAX RELIEF FOR AMERICAN WORKERS

   Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce 
legislation today that will help thousands of American workers with the 
financial burden associated with sending a daughter or son to college. 
In this climate of labor shortages, U.S. companies are looking for 
innovative ways to maintain and attract a dedicated and qualified 
workforce. Some companies have creatively turned to providing college 
scholarships for their employees' children. My legislation would allow 
employees to deduct these scholarships from their gross income. Under 
current law, an employee generally is not taxed on post-secondary 
education assistance provided by an employer for the benefit of the 
employee. My bill would extend this treatment to employer-provided 
education assistance for the employees' children, up to $2,000 per 
child.
  As many of my colleagues know, employer-provided education assistance 
is considered an integral tool in keeping America's workforce well 
trained and equipped to deal with the changing face of the New Economy. 
Current law not only allows companies to keep an up-to-date labor pool, 
but also allows many workers to move from low-wage, level positions up 
the economic ladder of success. Extending tax-free treatment to the 
children of employees not only will help working families, but will 
contribute to our nation's competitiveness in an increasingly dynamic 
global economy.
  My legislation is very simple. It allows employees whose companies 
provide educational scholarships for employees' children to exclude up 
to $2000 from gross income per child. An employee may not exclude more 
than $5,250 from gross income for employer education assistance. This 
is the limit established under Section 127(a)(2) of the Internal 
Revenue Code for employer education assistance. In essence, there would 
be ``family cap.'' Workers could deduct a $2,000 scholarship for their 
child and could also exclude up to $3,250 of educational benefits for 
themselves, however, the combined amounts could not exceed $5,250.
  I believe that Congress should do all it can to help families with 
the soaring costs of higher education. In today's economy, American 
companies are no longer looking purely for a high-school diploma, but 
require that their workers have some sort of post-secondary education 
or training. Many working families struggle in providing this basic 
start which will help their children get well-paying jobs.
  This piece of legislation is also a modest proposal. The Joint 
Committee on Taxation has scored this provision at $231 million over 10 
years. I look forward to working with my colleagues in making sure that 
this provision is fully offset in a responsible manner.
  Mr. President, I am pleased to lend my name to this initiative, for 
this legislation has been already introduced in a bi-partisan manner in 
the United States House of Representatives by Representatives Levin and 
English. This bill has the support of over 60 Members of the House and 
I plan on working to ensure that this bill receives the same sort of 
bipartisan support that its companion in the House enjoys.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH of Oregon (for himself, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Grams, and 
        Mr. Dodd):
  S. 1520. A bill to amend the U.S. Holocaust Assets Commission Act of 
1998 to extend the period by which the final report is due and to 
authorize additional funding; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
Urban Affairs.


         u.s. holocaust assets commission extension act of 1999

  Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President and Members of the Senate, next 
week our Nation will pass an important if unnoticed anniversary--the 
anniversary of one of the first official notifications we were given of 
the atrocities of the Holocaust.
  On August 8, 1942, Dr. Gerhart Reigner, the World Jewish Congress 
representative in Geneva, sent a cable to both Rabbi Stephen Wise--the 
President of the World Jewish Congress--and a British Member of 
Parliament. In it, Dr. Reigner wrote about ``an alarming report'' that 
Hitler was planning that all Jews in countries occupied or controlled 
Germany ``should after deportation and concentration . . . be 
exterminated at one blow to resolve once and for all the Jewish 
question in Europe.'' Our Government's reaction to this news was not 
our greatest moment during that terrible era.
  First, the State Department refused to give the cable to Rabbi Wise. 
After Rabbi Wise got a copy of the cable from the British, he passed it 
along to the Undersecretary of State, who asked him not to make the 
contents public until it could be confirmed. Rabbi Wise didn't make it 
public, but he did tell President Roosevelt, members of the cabinet, 
and Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter about the cable. None of 
them chose to act publicly on its contents.
  Our government finally did acknowledge the report some months later, 
but the question remains: how many lives could have been saved had we 
responded to this clear warning of the Holocaust earlier and with more 
vigor? The questions of how the United States responded to the 
Holocaust and, specifically, what was the fate of the Holocaust 
victims' assets that came into the possession or control of the United 
States government, is the focus of the Presidential Advisory Commission 
on Holocaust Assets in the United States, of which I am a member.

[[Page 19910]]

  This bipartisan Commission--chaired by Edgar M. Bronfman--is composed 
of 21 individuals, including four Senators, four Members of the House, 
representatives of the Departments of the Army, Justice, State, and 
Treasury, the Chairman of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council, 
and eight private citizens.
  The Commission is charged with conducting original research into what 
happened to the assets of Holocaust victims--including gold, other 
financial instruments and art and cultural objects--that passed into 
the possession or control of the Federal government, including the 
Federal Reserve. We are also to survey the research done by others 
about what happened to the assets of Holocaust victims that passed into 
non-Federal hands, including State governments, and report to the 
President, making recommendations for future actions, whether 
legislative or administrative.
  The Commission was created last year by a unanimous Act of Congress, 
and has been hard at work since early this year. Perhaps the most 
important information that the Commission's preliminary research has 
uncovered is the fact that the question of the extent to which assets 
of Holocaust victims fell into Federal hands is much, much larger than 
we thought even a year ago, when we first established this Commission.
  Last month, at the quarterly, meeting of the Commissioners in 
Washington, we unveiled a ``map'' of Federal and related offices 
through which these assets may have flowed. To everyone's surprise, 
taking a sample year--1943--we found more than 75 separate entities 
that may have been involved.
  The records of each of these offices must first be located and then 
scoured--page by page--at the National Archives and other record 
centers across the United States. In total, we must look at tens of 
million of pages to complete the historical record of this period.
  Futhermore, to our nation's credit, we are currently declassifying 
millions of pages of World War II-era information that may shine light 
on our government's policies and procedures during that time. But, this 
salutary effort dramatically increases the work the Commission must do 
to fulfill the mandate we have given it.
  In addition, as the Commission pursues its research, it is 
discovering new aspects of the story of Holocaust assets that hadn't 
previously been understood. The Commission's research may be unearthing 
an alarming trend to import into the United States through South 
America, art and other possessions looted from Holocaust victims. 
Pursuing these leads will require the review of additional thousands of 
documents.
  The Commission is also finding aspects of previously known incidents 
that have not been carefully or credibly researched. The ultimate fate 
of the so-called ``Hungarian Gold Trains,''--for example--a set of 
trains containing the art, gold, and other valuables of Hungarian 
victims of the Nazis that was detained by the liberating US Army during 
their dash for Berlin has not been carefully investigated.
  In another area of our research investigators are seeking to piece 
together the puzzle of foreign-owned intellectual property--some of 
which may have been owned by victims of Nazi genocide--the rights to 
which were vested in the Federal government under wartime law.
  For all the reasons and more, I am introducing today with Senators 
Boxer, Dodd and Grams the ``U.S. Holocaust Assets Commission Extension 
Act of 1999.'' This simple piece of legislation moves to December, 
2000, the date of the final report of the Presidential Advisory 
Commission on Holocaust Assets in the United States, giving our 
investigators the time to do a professional an credible job on the 
tasks the Congress has assigned to them.
  This bill also authorizes additional appropriations for the 
Commission to complete its work. I strongly urge all of my colleagues 
to join me in support of this necessary and simple piece of 
legislation.
  As we approach the end of the millennium, the United States is 
without a doubt the strongest nation on the face of the earth. Our 
strength, however, is not limited to our military and economic might. 
Our nation is strong because we have the resolve to look at ourselves 
and our history honestly and carefully--even if the truth we find shows 
us a less-than-flattering light.
  The Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets in the 
United States is seeking the truth about the belongings of Holocaust 
victims that came into the possession or control of the United States 
government. All of my colleagues should support this endeavor, and we 
must give the Commission the time and support it needs by supporting 
the U.S. Holocaust Assets Commission Extension Act of 1999.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1520

       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 ``U.S. Holocaust Assets 
     Commission Extension Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE U.S. HOLOCAUST ASSETS COMMISSION 
                   ACT OF 1998.

       (a) Extension of Time for Final Report.--Section 3(d)(1) of 
     the U.S. Holocaust Assets Commission Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 
     1621 nt.) is amended by striking ``December 31, 1999'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``December 31, 2000''.
       (b) Reauthorization of Appropriations.--Section 9 of the 
     U.S. Holocaust Assets Commission Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 1621 
     nt.) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$3,500,000'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``$6,000,000''; and
       (2) by striking ``1999, and 2000,'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``1999, 2000, and 2001,''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA:
  S. 1522. A bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act to ensure that all 
dogs and cats used by research facilities are obtained legally; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and forestry.


                 PET SAFETY AND PROTECTION ACT OF 1999

 Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Pet 
Safety and Protection Act of 1999, a bill to close a serious loophole 
in the Animal Welfare Act. Senators Kennedy, Durbin, Inouye and Lebin 
are cosponsors of the legislation.
  Congress passed the Animal Welfare Act over 30 years ago to stop the 
mistreatment of animals and to prevent the unintentional sale of family 
pets for laboratory experiments. Despite the Animal Welfare Act's well-
meaning intentions and the enforcement efforts of the Department of 
Agriculture, the Act routinely fails to provide pets and pet owners 
with reliable protection against the actions of some unethical dealers.
  Medical research is an invaluable weapon in the battle against 
disease. New drugs and surgical techniques offer promise in the fight 
against AIDS, cancer, and a host of life-threatening diseases. Animal 
research has been, and continues to be, fundamental to advancements in 
medicine. I am not here to argue whether animals should or should not 
be used in research. Rather, I am concerned with the sale of stolen 
pets and stray animals to research facilities.
  These are less than 40 ``random source'' animal dealers operating 
throughout the country who acquire tens of thousands of dogs and cats. 
``Random source'' dealers are USDA licensed Class B dealers that 
provide animals for research. Many of these animals are family pets, 
acquired by so-called ``bunchers'' who sometimes resort to theft and 
deception as they collect animals and sell them to Class B dealers. 
``Bunchers'' often respond to ``free pet to a good home'' 
advertisements, tricking animal owners into giving away their pets by 
posing as someone interested in adopting the dog or cat. Some random 
source dealers are known to keep hundreds of animals at a time in 
squalid conditions, providing them with little food or water. The 
mistreated animals often pass through several hands and across state 
lines before they are eventually sold by a random source dealer to a 
research laboratory.

[[Page 19911]]

  Mr. President, the use of these animals in research is subject to 
legitimate criticism because of the fraud, theft, and abuse that I have 
just described. Dr. Robert Whitney, former director for the Office of 
Animal Care and Use at the National Institutes of Health echoed this 
sentiment when he stated, ``The continue existence of these virtually 
unregulatable Class B dealers erodes the public confidence in our 
commitment to appropriate procurement, care, and use of animals in the 
important research to better the health of both humans and animals.'' 
While I doubt that laboratories intentionally seek out stolen or 
fraudulently obtained dogs and cats as research subjects, the fact 
remains that these animals end up in research laboratories, and little 
is being done to stop it. Mr. President, it is clear to most observers, 
including animal welfare organizations around the country, that this 
problem persists because of random source animal dealers.
  The Pet Safety and Protection Act strengthens the Animal Welfare Act 
by prohibiting the use of random source animal dealers as suppliers of 
dogs and cats to research laboratories. At the same time, the Pet 
Safety and Protection Act preserves the integrity of animal research by 
encouraging research laboratories to obtain animals from legitimate 
sources that comply with the Animal Welfare Act. Legitimate sources are 
USDA-licensed Class A dealers or breeders, municipal pounds that choose 
to release dogs and cats for research purposes, legitimate pet owners 
who want to donate their animals to research, and private and federal 
facilities that breed their own animals. These four sources are capable 
of supplying millions of animals for research, far more cats and dogs 
than are required by current laboratory demand. Furthermore, at least 
in the case of using municipal pounds, research laboratories could save 
money since pound animals cost only a few dollars compared to the high 
fees charged by random animal dealers. The National Institutes of 
Health, in an effort to curb abuse and deception, has already adopted 
policies against the acquisition of dogs and cats from random source 
dealers.
  The Pet Safety and Protection Act also reduces the Department of 
Agriculture's regulatory burden by allowing the Department to sue its 
resources more efficiently and effectively. Each year, hundreds of 
thousands of dollars are spent on regulating 40 random source dealers. 
To combat any future violations of the Animal Welfare Act, the Pet 
Safety and Protection Act increases the penalties under the Act to a 
minimum of $1,000 per violation.
  The history of disregard for the provisions of the Animal Welfare Act 
by some animal dealers makes the Pet Safety and Protection Act 
necessary. Mr. President, the purpose of this Act to stop the 
fraudulent practices of some Class B Dealers. Most importantly, it 
ensures that animals used in research are not gained by theft or 
deceit, and are provided decent shelter, ventilation, sanitation, and 
nourishment. The bill in no way impairs or impedes research, but ends 
senseless neglect, brutality, and deceit.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN:
  S. 1523. A bill to provide a safety net for agricultural producers 
through improvement of the marketing assistance loan program, expansion 
of land enrollment opportunities under the conservation reserve 
program, and maintenance of opportunities for foreign trade in United 
States agricultural commodities; to the Committee on Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry.


             ``HELP OUR PRODUCERS EQUITY (HOPE) ACT OF 1999

 Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation 
today to provide a ray of hope for our farmers across the country. The 
situation is dire in the agricultural community. Commodity prices are 
at Depression era levels and are projected to remain low through this 
year and beyond. Despite the federal government's efforts over the past 
year to alleviate some the financial strain affecting the agriculture 
industry, a simple fact remains: we no longer have a policy that 
protects farmers when forces beyond their control drive prices down.
  Farmers are the hardest working people I know. They work from dusk to 
dawn on land that has been past down from generation to generation. 
This heritage is in jeopardy of being lost due to depressed commodity 
prices and the lack of an adequate safety net for family farmers.
  The agricultural industry is the backbone of rural communities. I'm 
not just hearing from farmers about this crisis. In the past weeks and 
months, I've talked with bankers, tractor and implement dealers, 
fertilizer distributors, and even the local barber shop. They are all 
concerned about the train wreck that will occur if nothing is done to 
provide an adequate safety net for producers. The bottom line in rural 
America: if farmers are hurting, everyone is hurting.
  It's really ironic watching the news these days. We're too busy 
patting ourselves on the back over the strength of the stock market and 
a potential tax cut that we have all but forgotten those that are not 
benefitting from this record setting economy. This situation is very 
reminiscent of the roaring 20's that our country experienced earlier in 
the century, followed by the Great Depression of the 1930's. I hope and 
pray that it does not take a situation so severe and drastic to 
convince this Congress, and the nation, that our agricultural sector 
and domestic production needs our support.
  The HOPE Act that I am introducing today is built on solid but simple 
principles and takes steps to reestablish a safety net for our nation's 
farmers. To reconstruct the safety we must restore the formula based 
marketing loan structure that existed prior to the 1996 Farm Bill. Loan 
rates were arbitrarily capped in 1996 and I feel that it is imperative 
to return this assistance loan back into a formula based, market-
oriented program. In doing so, loan rates would more accurately reflect 
market trends and provide an adequate price floor for producers. No 
business in America can survive selling their products at levels below 
cost of production. With Depression era prices, that is the situation 
our farmers currently face. An adequate safety net must be restored. 
This legislation also extends the loan term by up to six months, 
allowing farmers more time to market their crops at the most 
advantageous price.
  Secondly, my legislation would require the President to fully explain 
the benefits and costs of existing food sanctions. It does not make 
sense to force Cuba to purchase their rice from Asia when the United 
States is only 90 miles away. Without access to foreign markets, we 
cannot expect the agricultural community to survive. We cannot let our 
foreign policy objectives cloud common sense. These sanctions rarely 
impose significant hardship on the dictators against whom they are 
targeted. The unfortunate victims are the innocent citizens of these 
foreign lands and the U.S. producers who lose valuable markets when 
these restrictions are put into place. We require cost/benefit analysis 
from almost all sections for our government regulators. We should do no 
less in our agricultural trade arena.
  I am also very committed to preserving our environment. The 
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and the Wetlands Reserve 
Program(WRP) are responsible for taking a great number of erodible 
acres out of production. Unfortunately, these programs are victims of 
their own success because they are near the maximum enrollment levels 
allowed by current law. I propose to expand these programs so that even 
more marginal acreage is eligible for participation.
  I urge my colleagues to act quickly and address the growing crisis in 
the agriculture community. Everyone of us enjoys the safest, most 
abundant, and most affordable food supply in the world. Unfortunately, 
we often take that for granted in this nation. The consequences of 
doing nothing are far too great. This safe and abundant supply will not 
be there for this Nation or the world if we do not support our family 
farmers at this critical time.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BREAUX:
  S. 1524. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for 
the

[[Page 19912]]

creation of a certification program for Motor Carrier Safety Specialist 
and certain informational requirements in order to promote highway 
safety through a comprehensive review of motor carriers; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


           motor carrier safety specialist certification act

  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Motor Carrier 
Safety Specialist Act. The reason for the Act is to ensure that all 
inspectors performing compliance reviews on inter- and intra-state 
motor carriers are certified to a uniform standard and proficiency. 
This Act is in part a response to the recent bus accident in Louisiana 
by Custom Bus Charter, Inc. in which 22 people were killed, and in 
which the driver was found to have marijuana in his system.
  In July 1996, just four months after the Federal Highway 
Administration (``FHWA'') inspected and assigned a Satisfactory rating 
to Customs Bus Charter, Inc., a private company under contract to the 
Department of Defense failed Custom Bus Charter, Inc. for not having a 
drug and alcohol testing program. The absence of a drug and alcohol 
testing program is a FHWA Critical violation for which the carrier 
should have been assigned, at best, a Conditional rating by FHWA. 
Furthermore, 27 percent of motor carriers that were assigned a 
Satisfactory rating by FHWA, failed to enter the DoD program because of 
Critical violations discovered by the DoD contractor. These examples 
demonstrate that FHWA does not have the resources and structure to 
certify inspectors, and that compliance reviews are not always 
performed in a consistent or accurate manner.
  In addition to inconsistent inspection, FHWA cannot possibly collect 
sufficient safety information on the motor carrier industry. There are 
estimated to be more than 450,000 inter-state motor carriers licensed 
to do business in the U.S. The Federal Highway Administration has the 
resources to conduct only a limited number of compliance reviews 
annually. While they intend to double the current level of inspections, 
this will only bring the total to approximately 8,000 inspections 
annually, less than 2 percent of the estimated motor carrier 
population, with more than twice that amount entering and exiting the 
market. Over 70 percent of existing motor carriers have never been 
inspected by FHWA, and fewer than 5 percent of the inspections 
conducted could be considered current, within the past three years.
  Clearly, the problem is twofold: FHWA is in desperate need of more 
information regarding the compliance level of carriers licensed to do 
business, and, those individuals that collect the information through 
inspections must possess some uniform level of competence and 
consistency. Thus, this Act is needed to certify all Motor Carrier 
Safety Specialists, both in the private and pubic sectors, so that 
these professionals can perform consistent compliance reviews and 
provide safety data on motor carriers to the government, industry, and 
the public. The Act not only provides for certification and training of 
federal motor carrier safety specialists, but state, local, and third-
party safety specialists as well.
  Third-party, private auditors can provide additional information to 
assist FHWA in monitoring carrier performance. Previously, the FHWA has 
not accepted information from private sources because there is no 
certification of their proficiency. The Motor Carrier Safety Specialist 
Certification Board, a non-profit organization, would be formed by 
technical representatives of the transportation industry, for the 
expressed purpose of working with the Secretary of Transportation to 
establish a training and certification program for Motor Carrier Safety 
Specialists and to serve as a clearinghouse for motor carrier data from 
third-party auditors. This follows the policy contained in Office of 
Management and Budget Circular Number A-119 and directs agencies to use 
voluntary standards where possible and the model used successfully by 
the Environmental Protection Agency for referring federally-mandated 
certification to private organizations.
  Further, FHWA needs accurate and current information on motor 
carriers in order to target its resources towards problem carriers. 
Investigations by the General Accounting Office and the Department of 
Transportation's Inspector General found that FHWA motor carrier data 
are inadequate and out-of-date, limiting FHWA's ability to identify and 
target ``at risk'' carriers. Private auditors could provide additional 
information to augment FHWA's database. The Motor Carrier Safety 
Specialist Certification Board would establish a program to collect and 
verify current information on motor carriers, and provide this 
information to the Federal Highway Administration to augment their 
database.
  Finally, the public must play a role in removing unsafe carriers from 
U.S. highways by considering safety first when hiring a motor carrier. 
Simply put, if the public does not hire carriers that have poor safety 
performance, they will be put out of business and off our nation's 
highways. A media campaign must be implemented to educate the public on 
their role in increasing motor carrier safety, and about publicly 
available information systems that provide safety information on motor 
carriers. Two such internet-accessible systems are the publicly-funded 
FHWA SAFER system and the privately funded International Motor Carrier 
Audit Commission (IMCAC).
  This program can be quickly implemented due to the support of 
existing groups that are equipped to carry out training, certification 
and clearinghouse functions, such as the Commercial Vehicle Safety 
Alliance (CVSA) which currently provides certification for roadside 
vehicle inspectors, and the International Motor Carrier Audit 
Commission (IMCAC) which currently provides safety data to the public.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed into 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1524

       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 ``Motor Carrier Safety 
     Specialist Certification Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following;
       (1) The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century 
     provides for the Secretary of Transportation to work in 
     partnership with States and other political jurisdictions to 
     establish programs to improve motor carrier, commercial motor 
     vehicle, and driver safety, to support a safe and efficient 
     transportation system by focusing resources on strategic 
     safety investments, to promote safe for-hire and private 
     transportation, including transportation of passengers and 
     hazardous materials, to identify high-risk carriers and 
     drivers, and to invest in activities likely to generate 
     maximum reductions in the number and severity of commercial 
     motor vehicle crashes.
       (2) The Department of Transportation's Office of Inspector 
     General Report on the Federal Highway Administration's Motor 
     Carrier Safety Program found that established policies and 
     procedures do not ensure that motor carrier safety 
     regulations are enforced.
       (3) The Report also found that the Safety Status 
     Measurement System (known as ``SafeStat''), which was 
     implemented to identify and target motor carriers with high-
     risk safety records, cannot target all carriers with the 
     worst records because its database is incomplete and 
     inaccurate, and data input is not timely.
       (4) Testimony by the General Accounting Office before the 
     House of Representative's Subcommittee on Transportation and 
     Related Agencies indicated that SafeStat's ability to target 
     high-risk carriers is also limited by out-of-date census 
     data.
       (5) There are no procedures in place to certify Federal, 
     State, and private motor carrier safety specialists and no 
     standards to ensure consistent carrier compliance reviews.
       (6) There are no established protocols for acceptance of 
     data from third-party or non-Federal or non-State motor 
     carrier safety specialists, which detail the safety factors 
     of motor carriers.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to provide for the 
     creation of a certification program for Motor Carrier Safety 
     Specialists and to establish certain informational 
     requirements in order to promote highway safety through a 
     comprehensive review of motor carriers.

[[Page 19913]]



     SEC. 3. CREATION OF A CERTIFICATION PROGRAM FOR MOTOR CARRIER 
                   SAFETY SPECIALISTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 311 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``Sec. 31148. Certified motor carrier safety specialists
       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation, in 
     consultation with the Motor Carrier Safety Specialist 
     Certification Board, shall establish a program for the 
     training and certification of Federal, State and local 
     government, and nongovernmental motor carrier safety 
     specialists by an organization described in section 501(c)(3) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that is--
       ``(1) exempt from taxation under section 501(c)(1) of such 
     Code established for the exclusive purpose of developing and 
     administering training, testing, and certification procedures 
     for motor carrier safety specialists; and
       ``(2) designated by the Secretary as the entity for 
     carrying out the requirements of this section.
       ``(b) Certified Compliance Review Required.--No safety 
     compliance review under this chapter, or required by this 
     chapter, chapter 315, or the regulations in part 390 of title 
     49, Code of Federal Regulations, more than 3 years after the 
     date of enactment of the Motor Carrier Safety Specialist 
     Certification Act is valid unless it is conducted by a motor 
     carrier safety specialist certified under the program 
     established under subsection (a).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     311 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end thereof the following:
       ``31148. Certified motor carrier safety specialists.''.

     SEC. 4. PHASE-IN OF CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.

       (a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation shall establish the program required by 
     section 31148(a) of title 49, United States Code, within 12 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Certification of Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
     Specialist.--The Secretary shall ensure that--
       (1) within 24 months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act--
       (A) at least 50 percent of the employees of the Department 
     of Transportation who perform reviews to determine compliance 
     of carriers in accordance with regulations promulgated by the 
     Secretary of Transportation, and
       (B) all State and local government employees who perform 
     such compliance reviews, are certified under the program 
     established under section 31148 of title 49, United States 
     Code; and
       (2) within 36 months after such date, all Federal, State 
     and local employees, and all nongovernmental personnel, 
     performing such compliance review are so certified.

     SEC. 5. CLEARINGHOUSE FUNCTION.

       (a) Verification of Information.--Section 31106(a) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(5) In carrying out the provisions of this section and 
     section 31309, the Secretary shall accept and include 
     information, subject to verification by a clearinghouse 
     designated by the Motor Carrier Safety Specialist 
     certification Board, obtained from non-governmental motor 
     carrier safety specialists certified under section 31148. The 
     Secretary of Transportation shall work with the Motor Carrier 
     Safety Specialist Certification Board and State Governments 
     to establish by January 1, 2001 data exchange protocols that 
     will enable the Secretary of Transportation to process data 
     received from motor carrier safety specialists certified 
     under section 31148.''
       (b) Information Available to Public.--Section 31105(e) of 
     title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``The Secretary of Transportation shall ensure that 
     information obtained from motor carrier safety specialists 
     certified under section 31148 of title 49 United States Code 
     is made available to the public, in accordance with such 
     policy, in an easily accessible and understandable manner 
     through the clearinghouse designated by the Motor Carrier 
     Safety Specialist Certification Board no later than January 
     1, 2002.''

     SEC. 6. PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNCTION.

       The Secretary of Transportation shall work with the Motor 
     Carrier Safety Specialist Certification Board to establish 
     and carry out a public education campaign to promote the use 
     of safety performance information available under chapter 311 
     of title 49, United States Code, for the purpose of 
     encouraging the use of such information in the decision-
     making process for hiring motor carriers.

     SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS

       (a) Motor Carrier Safety Specialist.--A Motor Carrier 
     Safety Specialist is an individual who:
       (1) is responsible for conducting regulatory compliance 
     reviews and safety inspections of commercial motor carriers;
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself and Mr. INOUYE):
  S. 1525. A bill to provide for equitable compensation of the Spokane 
Tribe of Indians of the Spokane Reservation in settlement of its claims 
concerning its contribution to the production of hydropower by the 
Grand Coulee Dam, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian 
Affairs.


                    THE SPOKANE TRIBE SETTLEMENT ACT

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce on behalf 
of myself and the distinguished Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Inouye, ``The 
Spokane Tribe of Indians of the Spokane Reservation Grand Coulee Dam 
Equitable Compensation Act.'' This bill will provide a settlement of 
the claims of the Spokane Tribe for its contribution to the production 
of hydropower by the Grand Coulee Dam.
  The Grand Coulee Dam is the largest concrete dam in the world, the 
largest electricity producer in the United States, and the third 
largest electricity producer in the world. Grand Coulee is one mile in 
width; its spillway is twice the height of Niagara Falls. It provides 
electricity and water to one of the world's largest irrigation 
projects, the one million acre Columbia Basin Project. The Grand Coulee 
is the backbone of the Northwest's federal power grid and agricultural 
economy.
  To the Spokane Tribe, however, the Grand Coulee Dam brought an end to 
a way of life. The dam flooded their reservation on two sides. The 
Spokane River changed from a free flowing waterway that supported 
plentiful salmon runs, to barren slack water that now erodes the 
southern lands of the reservation. The benefits that accrued to the 
nation and the Northwest were made possible by uncompensated injury to 
the Native Americans of the Columbia and Spokane Rivers.
  The legislation I am introducing seeks to compensate the Spokane 
Tribe for its losses. In 1994, Congress enacted similar settlement 
legislation to compensate the neighboring Confederated Colville Tribes. 
That legislation provided a onetime payment of $53 million for past 
damages and approximately $15 million annually from the proceeds from 
the sale of hydropower by the Bonneville Power Administration. The 
Spokane Tribe settlement legislation would provide a settlement 
proportional to that provided to the Colville Tribes, which was based 
on the percentage of lands appropriated from the respective tribes for 
the dam. This translates into 39.4% of the past and future compensation 
awarded the Colville Tribes.
  Let me give my colleagues some of the background surrounding this 
issue. From 1927 to 1931, at the direction of Congress, the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers investigated the Columbia River and its tributaries. 
In its report to Congress, the Corps recommended the Grande Coulee site 
for hydroelectric development. In 1933, the Department of Interior 
federalized the project under the National Industrial Recovery Act, and 
in 1935, Congress authorized the project in the Rivers and Harbors Act.
  In 1940, Congress enacted a statute to authorize the Interior 
Department to designate whichever Indian lands it deemed necessary for 
Grand Coulee construction and to receive all rights, title and interest 
the Indians had in them. In return, the Tribes received compensation in 
the amount determined by Interior Department appraisals. However, the 
only land that was appraised and for which Tribes were compensated was 
the newly flooded land, for which the Spokane Tribe received $4700. 
There is no evidence that the Department advised or that Congress knew 
that the Tribes' water rights were not extinguished. Neither was there 
evidence the Department know the Indian title and trust status for the 
Tribal land underlying the river beds had not been extinguished. No 
compensation was included for the power value contributed by the use of 
the Tribal resources or for the loss of the Tribal fisheries or other 
damages to Tribal resources.
  As pointed out in a 1976 Opinion of Lawrence Aschenbrenner, the 
Acting Associate Solicitor, Division of Indian Affairs, Department of 
Interior

       The 1940 act followed seven years of construction during 
     which farm lands, and timber lands were flooded, and a 
     fishery destroyed, and during which Congress was silent as to 
     the Indian interests affected by

[[Page 19914]]

     the construction. Both the Congress and the Department of 
     Interior appeared to proceed with the Grand Coulee project as 
     if there were no Indians involved there. . . . There is no 
     tangible evidence, currently available, to indicate that the 
     Department ever consulted with the Tribes during the 1993-
     1940 period concerning the ongoing destruction of their land 
     and resources and proposed compensation therefore. . . . It 
     is our conclusion that the location of the dams on tribal 
     land and the use of the water for power production, without 
     compensation, violated the government's fiduciary duty toward 
     the Tribes.

  In 1994, the Colville legislation settled the claims of the Colville 
Tribes to a share of the hydropower revenues from the Grand Coulee Dam. 
This claim was among the claims which the Colville Tribes filed with 
the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) under the Act of August 13, 1946, 
which included a five year statute of limitations. While the Colville 
Tribes had been formally organized for more than 15 years, the Spokane 
Tribe did not formally organize until 16 days prior to the ICC statute 
of limitations deadline. In addition, while the BIA was aware of the 
potential claims of the Spokane Tribe to a portion of the hydropower 
revenues generated by Grand Coulee, there is no evidence that the BIA 
ever advised the Tribe of such claims. The settlement for the Spokane 
Tribes was not included with that for the Colville Tribes in 1994 
because the Colvilles had concerns that the statute of limitations 
would hold up the legislation.
  Since the 1970s, Congress and federal agencies have indicated that 
both the Colville and Spokane Tribes should be compensated. Since 1994, 
when an agreement was reached to compensate the Colville Tribes, 
Congress and federal agencies have expressed interest in providing 
equitable compensation to the Spokane Tribe. This legislation will 
provide for the long overdue settlement to which the Spokane Tribe is 
entitled. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1525

       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 ``Spokane Tribe of Indians of 
     the Spokane Reservation Grand Coulee Dam Equitable 
     Compensation Settlement Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress find the following:
       (1) From 1927 to 1931, at the direction of Congress, the 
     Corps of Engineers investigated the Columbia River and its 
     tributaries to determine sites where power could be produced 
     at low cost.
       (2) The Corps of Engineers listed a number of sites, 
     including the site where the Grand Coulee Dam is now located, 
     with recommendations that the power development be performed 
     by local governmental authorities or private utilities under 
     the Federal Power Act.
       (3) Under section 10(e) of the Federal Power Act, licensees 
     must pay Indian tribes for the use of reservation lands.
       (4) The Columbia Basin Commission, an agency of the State 
     of Washington, applied for, and in August 1933 received, a 
     preliminary permit from the Federal Power Commission for 
     water power development of the Grand Coulee Site.
       (5) In the mid-1930's, the Federal Government, which is not 
     subject to the Federal Power Act, federalized the Grand 
     Coulee Dam project and began construction of the Grand Coulee 
     Dam.
       (6) At the time the Grand Coulee Dam project was 
     federalized, the Federal Government knew and recognized that 
     the Spokane Tribe and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation had compensable interests in the Grand Coulee Dam 
     project, including but not limited to development of 
     hydropower, extinguishment of a salmon fishery upon which the 
     Spokane Tribe was almost totally dependent, and inundation of 
     lands with loss of potential power sites previously 
     identified by the Spokane Tribe.
       (7) In an Act dated June 29, 1940 (54 Stat. 703; 16 U.S.C. 
     835d), Congress enacted legislation to grant to the United 
     States all the rights of the Indians in lands of the Spokane 
     Tribe and Colville Indian Reservations required for the Grand 
     Coulee Dam project and various rights-of-way over Indian 
     lands required in connection with the project. The Act 
     provided that compensation for the lands and rights-of-way 
     required shall be determined by the Secretary of the Interior 
     in such amounts as such Secretary determines just and 
     equitable.
       (8) In furtherance of the Act of June 29, 1940, the 
     Secretary of the Interior paid to the Spokane Tribe the total 
     sum of $4,700. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation received a payment of $63,000.
       (9) In 1994, following 43 years of litigation before the 
     Indian Claims Commission, the United States Court of Federal 
     Claims and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 
     Circuit, Congress ratified an agreement between the 
     Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the 
     United States that provided for past damages and annual 
     payments of $15,250,000 in perpetuity, adjusted annually, 
     based on revenues for the sale of electric power and 
     transmission of such power by the Bonneville Power 
     Administration.
       (10) In legal opinions issued throughout the years by the 
     Department of the Interior Solicitor's Office a Task Force 
     Study conducted from 1976 to 1980 ordered by the Senate 
     Appropriations Committee, and in hearings before the Congress 
     when the Confederated Tribes Act was enacted, it has 
     repeatedly been recognized that the Spokane Tribe suffered 
     similar damages and had a case legally comparable with that 
     of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation with 
     the sole exception that the 5-year statute of limitations 
     provided in the Indian Claims Commission Act of 1946 
     prevented the Spokane Tribe from bringing its own action for 
     fair and honorable dealings as provided in that Act.
       (11) The failure of the Spokane Tribe to bring an action of 
     its own before the Indian Claims Commission can be attributed 
     to a combination of factors, including the failure of the 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs to carry out its advisory 
     responsibilities as required by the Indian Claims Commission 
     Act (Act of August 13, 1946, ch. 959, 60 Stat. 1050) and an 
     effort of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to impose 
     improper requirements on claims attorneys retained by Indian 
     tribes which caused delays in retention of counsel and full 
     investigation of the Spokane Tribe's potential claims.
       (12) As a consequence of construction of the Grand Coulee 
     Dam project, the Spokane Tribe has suffered the complete loss 
     of the salmon fishery upon which it was dependent, the loss 
     of identified hydropower sites it could have developed, the 
     loss of hydropower revenues it would have received under the 
     Federal Power Act had the project not been federalized, and 
     it continues to lose hydropower revenues which the Federal 
     Government recognized the Spokane Tribe was due at the time 
     the project was constructed.
       (13) Over 39 percent of the Indian-owned lands used for the 
     Grand Coulee Dam project were Spokane Tribe lands.

     SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to provide fair and equitable 
     compensation to the Spokane Tribe on a basis that is 
     proportionate to the compensation provided to the 
     Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation for the 
     damages and losses suffered as a consequence of construction 
     and operation of the Grand Coulee Dam project.

     SEC. 4. SETTLEMENT FUND ACCOUNT.

       (a) Establishment of Account.--There is hereby established 
     in the Treasury an interest bearing account to be known as 
     the ``Spokane Tribe of Indians Settlement Fund Account''.
       (b) Deposit of Amounts.--
       (1) Initial deposit.--Upon enactment of this Act and 
     appropriation of funds, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     deposit into the Fund Account a sum equal to 39.4 percent of 
     the sum paid to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville 
     Reservation in a lump sum pursuant to section 5(a) of the 
     Confederated Tribes Act, adjusted by the consumer price index 
     from the date of that payment of the Confederated Tribes 
     until the date of enactment of this Act, as payment and 
     satisfaction of the Spokane Tribe's claim for use of its 
     lands for generation of hydropower for the period from 1940 
     through November 2, 1994, the date of the enactment of the 
     Confederated Tribes Act.
       (2) Subsequent deposits.--Commencing on September 30 of the 
     first fiscal year following enactment of this Act and on 
     September 30 of each of the 5 fiscal years following such 
     fiscal year, the Administrator of the Bonneville Power 
     Administration shall pay into the Fund Account a sum equal to 
     20 percent of 39.4 percent of the sum authorized to be paid 
     to the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation 
     pursuant to section 5(b) of the Confederated Tribes Act 
     through the end of the fiscal year during which this Act is 
     enacted, adjusted by the consumer price index to maintain the 
     purchasing power the Spokane Tribe would have had if annual 
     payments had been made to the Spokane Tribe on the date 
     annual payments commenced and were subsequently made to the 
     Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation pursuant to 
     section 5(b) of the Confederated Tribes Act.
       (e) Annual Payments.--On September 1 of the fiscal year 
     following the enactment of this Act and of each fiscal year 
     thereafter, payments shall be made by the Bonneville Power 
     Administration, or any successor thereto, directly to the 
     Spokane Tribe in an amount which is equal to 39.4 percent of 
     the annual payment authorized to be paid to the Confederated 
     Tribes of the Colville Reservation in the operative and each 
     subsequent

[[Page 19915]]

     fiscal year pursuant to section 5(b) of the Confederated 
     Tribes Act.

     SEC. 5. USE AND TREATMENT OF SETTLEMENT FUNDS.

       (a) Transfer of Funds to Tribe.--The Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall transfer all or any portion of the settlement 
     funds described in section 4(a) to the Spokane Business 
     Council not later than 60 days after such Secretary receives 
     written notice of the adoption by the Spokane Business 
     Council of a resolution requesting that such Secretary 
     execute the transfer of such funds. Subsequent requests may 
     be made and funds transferred if not all of the funds are 
     requested at one time.
       (b) Use of Initial Payment Funds.--
       (1) General discretionary funds.--Twenty-five percent of 
     the settlement funds described in section 4(a) and (b) shall 
     be reserved by the Business Council and used for 
     discretionary purposes of general benefit to all members of 
     the Spokane Tribe.
       (2) Funds for Specific Purposes.--Seventy-five percent of 
     the settlement funds described in section 4(a) and (b) shall 
     be used for the following:
       (A) Resource development program.
       (B) Credit program.
       (C) Scholarship program.
       (D) Reserve, investment, and economic development programs.
       (c) Use of Annual Payment Funds.--Annual payments made to 
     the Spokane Tribe pursuant to section 4(c) may be used or 
     invested by the Spokane Tribe in the same manner as other 
     tribal governmental funds.
       (d) Approval of Secretary Not Required.--Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, the approval of the Secretary of 
     the Treasury or the Secretary of the Interior for any 
     payment, distribution, or use of the principal, interest, or 
     income generated by any settlement funds transferred or paid 
     to the Spokane Tribe pursuant to this Act shall not be 
     required and such Secretaries shall have no trust 
     responsibility for the investment, supervision, 
     administration, or expenditure of such funds once such funds 
     are transferred to or paid directly to the Spokane Tribe.
       (c) Treatment of Funds for Certain Purposes.--The payments 
     or distributions of any portion of the principal, interest, 
     and income generated by the settlement funds described in 
     section 4 shall be treated in the same manner as payments or 
     distributions from the Investment Fund described in section 6 
     of Public Law 99-346 (100 Stat. 677).
       (f) Tribal Audit.--The settlement funds described in 
     section 4, once transferred or paid to the Spokane Tribe, 
     shall be considered Spokane Tribe governmental funds and, as 
     other tribal governmental funds, be subject to an annual 
     tribal governmental audit.

     SEC. 6. REPAYMENT CREDIT.

       Beginning in the fiscal year following enactment of this 
     Act and continuing for so long as annual payments are made 
     under this Act, the Administrator of the Bonneville Power 
     Administration shall deduct from the interest payable to the 
     Secretary of the Treasury from net proceeds as defined in 
     section 13 of the Federal Columbia River Transmission System 
     Act, a percentage of the payment made to the Spokane Tribe 
     for the prior fiscal year. The actual percentage of such 
     deduction shall be calculated and adjusted to ensure that the 
     Bonneville Power Administration receives a deduction 
     comparable to that which it receives for payments made to the 
     Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation pursuant to 
     the Confederated Tribes Act. Each deduction made under this 
     section shall be credited to the interest payments otherwise 
     payable by the Administrator to the Secretary of the Treasury 
     during the fiscal year in which the deduction is made, and 
     shall be allocated pro rata to all interest payments on debt 
     associated with the generation function of the Federal 
     Columbia River Power System that are due during that fiscal 
     year; except that, if the deduction in any fiscal year is 
     greater than the interest due on debt associated with the 
     generation function for the fiscal year, then the amount of 
     the deduction that exceeds the interest due on debt 
     associated with the general function shall be allocated pro 
     rata to all other interest payments due during that fiscal 
     year. To the extent that the deduction exceeds the total 
     amount of any such interest, the deduction shall be applied 
     as a credit against any other payments that the Administrator 
     makes to the Secretary of the Treasury.

     SEC. 7. SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS.

       Payment under section 4 shall constitute full payment and 
     satisfaction of the Spokane Tribe's claim to a fair share of 
     the annual hydropower revenues generated by the Grand Coulee 
     Dam project from 1940 through the fiscal year prior to the 
     fiscal year during which this Act is enacted and represents 
     the Spokane Tribe's proportional entitlement of hydropower 
     revenues based on the lump sum payment for damages from 1940 
     through 1994 and the annual payments by the Bonneville Power 
     Administration to the Colville Tribes commencing in fiscal 
     year 1995 through the fiscal year that this Act is enacted.

     SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purposes of this Act--
       (1) the term ``Confederated Tribes Act'' means the 
     Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation Grand Coulee 
     Dam Settlement Act (P.L. 103-436; 108 Stat. 4577);
       (2) the term ``Fund Account'' means the Spokane Tribe of 
     Indians Settlement Fund Account established under section 
     4(a); and
       (3) the term ``Spokane Tribe'' means the Spokane Tribe of 
     Indians of the Spokane Reservation.

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself, Mr. Robb, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. 
        Kerry, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Daschle):
  S. 1526. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a tax credit to taxpayers investing in entities seeking to provide 
capital to create new markets in low-income communities; to the 
Committee on Finance.


                         new markets tax credit

  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a new tool, 
the ``New Markets Tax Credit,'' to be used to expand economic 
development opportunities in low-income communities in West Virginia 
and across this country. I'm very pleased that my good friends, Senator 
Robb, Sarbanes, Kennedy, and Kerry, are joining me in this effort.
  Despite the unprecedented period of expansion of the U.S. economy, 
many urban and rural areas continue to be held back by stubborn 
problems such as high unemployment and underemployment, insufficient 
affordable housing, shortages of services such as day care and shopping 
centers, and perhaps most importantly, by a chronic shortage of the 
private investment capital needed to stimulate and support community 
development.
  For example, in West Virginia, we have counties where the official 
unemployment rate is as high as 14%. Counties like Mingo, McDowell, 
Logan and Boone have seen devastating job losses in the past two 
decades. For these rural communities, the nation's current economic 
boom is a distant echo. It's not that these people do not want to work, 
or that the entrepreneurial spirit is lacking. A major factor is the 
lack of private sector equity investment for business growth.
  I have been pursuing economic development opportunities for my state 
for over 30 years, and perhaps the largest problem I've encountered is 
the lack of venture capital. America's most depressed economic areas 
desperately need private investment. They get very little not only 
because they are unattractive, but also because of misperceptions and 
market failures. A lack of information, for instance, means that many 
companies may have an exaggerated idea of the risk of investing in 
deprived areas, and often have no idea of potential markets. Yes, it is 
true that private venture capital investment rose 24% in 1998, 76% of 
the total went to technology-based companies--primarily in California's 
Silicon Valley and New England's high-tech corridors. But only 5.7% of 
all venture capital in 1998 went to South Central, Southwest and 
Northwest regions combined. Obviously, this is a huge disparity that 
needs to be corrected.
  The New Markets Tax Credit is designed to encourage $6 billion in 
private sector equity investment for business growth in low and 
moderate income rural and urban communities. It would do that by 
providing tax credits for investments of $1.2 billion annually. The 
investments would be made by banks, foundations, companies or 
individuals. These investors would acquire stock or other equity 
interests in selected community economic development entities whose 
primary mission is serving distressed communities. Urban and rural 
communities with high poverty and low median income would be targeted.
  The tax credits would be issued by the U.S. Department of Treasury to 
the selected entities. These entities in turn would sell or syndicate 
the credit to investors. The tax credit ultimately delivered to the 
investor would be in the amount of 6 percent annually of the amount of 
the investment, for an approximate aggregate value to the investor of 
25 percent of the ``present value'' of the original investment over the 
7 years. A ``qualified investment''

[[Page 19916]]

by an investor would be a cash purchase of stock or other equity in a 
selected entity, which must be held for at least 7 years. Substantially 
all of the investment would be required to be used by the community 
economic development entity to make ``qualified low-income community 
investments,'' which would be equity investments in, or loans to, 
qualified active businesses in the low-income communities.
  The goal of this tax credit will be to encourage private investors 
who may have never considered investing in high-risk areas to do so. By 
investing in the community through local businesses private investors 
can explore new markets and improve the quality of life for the people 
in the area. Community development organizations may use the funds from 
private investors to develop micro-enterprise, manufacturing 
businesses, commercial facilities, communities facilities, like child 
care facilities and senior centers and co-operatives. It has the 
potential to encourage $6 billion in venture capital to these high-risk 
areas. And because community development vehicles may not redeem the 
equity interest for at least seven years, capital stays in the 
community. The New Markets Tax Credit will create new relationships 
between investors, community development vehicles, and small 
businesses, which will foster continued support and lasting investment.
  Mr. President, I believe that the New Markets Tax Credit may be one 
of the most promising and viable new idea for genuine economic 
development in distressed urban and rural communities in recent years. 
President Clinton has highlighted this proposal as part of his FY2000 
budget, and just last month took the case to people across the country, 
those parts of our country which have been too long ignored can 
experience real benefit from this type of initiative. Communities, 
businesses, and investors are responding enthusiastically.
  Hope that is backed up by a strong program of economic investment is 
needed in West Virginia and urban and rural communities throughout 
America. We have all heard the talk in the recent weeks as proponents 
of massive new tax breaks argue that we should send even more money 
back to those who have benefited the most from our historic economic 
expansion. I believe it would be irresponsible for us to create ways to 
provide additional tax relief to those in our society who need the 
least assistance before we make a concerted effort to revitalize the 
parts of our country, and to help the people of our country, who have 
been noticeably left out of the prosperity that went elsewhere. If 
we're going to do more for those who need it least, let us also commit 
to do what we can to propel those most in need of a helping hand into 
the future with real hope of economic success. The New Markets Tax 
Credit is one solid way to do just that.
  I urge my colleagues to examine this proposal carefully and give it 
their full support. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1526

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

     SECTION 1. NEW MARKETS TAX CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     business-related credits) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 45D. NEW MARKETS TAX CREDIT.

     ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of section 38, in the case 
     of a taxpayer who holds a qualified equity investment on a 
     credit allowance date of such investment which occurs during 
     the taxable year, the new markets tax credit determined under 
     this section for such taxable year is an amount equal to 6 
     percent of the amount paid to the qualified community 
     development entity for such investment at its original issue.
       ``(2) Credit allowance date.--The term `credit allowance 
     date' means, with respect to any qualified equity 
     investment--
       ``(A) the date on which such investment is initially made, 
     and
       ``(B) each of the 6 anniversary dates of such date 
     thereafter.
       ``(b) Qualified Equity Investment.--For purposes of this 
     section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified equity investment' 
     means any equity investment in a qualified community 
     development entity if--
       ``(A) such investment is acquired by the taxpayer at its 
     original issue (directly or through an underwriter) solely in 
     exchange for cash,
       ``(B) substantially all of the proceeds from such 
     investment is used by the qualified community development 
     entity to make qualified low-income community investments, 
     and
       ``(C) such investment is designated for purposes of this 
     section by the qualified community development entity.

     Such term shall not include any equity investment issued by a 
     qualified community development entity more than 7 years 
     after the date that such entity receives an allocation under 
     subsection (f). Any allocation not used within such 7-year 
     period may be reallocated by the Secretary under subsection 
     (f).
       ``(2) Limitation.--The maximum amount of equity investments 
     issued by a qualified community development entity which may 
     be designated under paragraph (1)(C) by such entity shall not 
     exceed the portion of the limitation amount allocated under 
     subsection (f) to such entity.
       ``(3) Safe harbor for determining use of cash.--The 
     requirement of paragraph (1)(B) shall be treated as met if at 
     least 85 percent of the aggregate gross assets of the 
     qualified community development entity are invested in 
     qualified low-income community investments.
       ``(4) Treatment of subsequent purchasers.--The term 
     `qualified equity investment' includes any equity investment 
     which would (but for paragraph (1)(A)) be a qualified equity 
     investment in the hands of the taxpayer if such investment 
     was a qualified equity investment in the hands of a prior 
     holder.
       ``(5) Redemptions.--A rule similar to the rule of section 
     1202(c)(3) shall apply for purposes of this subsection.
       ``(6) Equity investment.--The term `equity investment' 
     means--
       ``(A) any stock in a qualified community development entity 
     which is a corporation, and
       ``(B) any capital interest in a qualified community 
     development entity which is a partnership.
       ``(c) Qualified Community Development Entity.--For purposes 
     of this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified community 
     development entity' means any domestic corporation or 
     partnership if--
       ``(A) the primary mission of the entity is serving, or 
     providing investment capital for, low-income communities or 
     low-income persons,
       ``(B) the entity maintains accountability to residents of 
     low-income communities through representation on governing or 
     advisory boards or otherwise, and
       ``(C) the entity is certified by the Secretary for purposes 
     of this section as being a qualified community development 
     entity.
       ``(2) Special rules for certain organizations.--The 
     requirements of paragraph (1) shall be treated as met by--
       ``(A) any specialized small business investment company (as 
     defined in section 1044(c)(3)), and
       ``(B) any community development financial institution (as 
     defined in section 103 of the Community Development Banking 
     and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 4702)).
       ``(d) Qualified Low-Income Community Investments.--For 
     purposes of this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified low-income community 
     investment' means--
       ``(A) any equity investment in, or loan to, any qualified 
     active low-income community business,
       ``(B) the purchase from another community development 
     entity of any loan made by such entity which is a qualified 
     low-income community investment if the amount received by 
     such other entity from such purchase is used by such other 
     entity to make qualified low-income community investments,
       ``(C) financial counseling and other services specified in 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary to businesses located 
     in, and residents of, low-income communities, and
       ``(D) any equity investment in, or loan to, any qualified 
     community development entity if substantially all of the 
     investment or loan is used by such entity to make qualified 
     low-income community investments described in subparagraphs 
     (A), (B), and (C).
       ``(2) Qualified active low-income community business.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the term 
     `qualified active low-income community business' means, with 
     respect to any taxable year, any corporation or partnership 
     if for such year--
       ``(i) at least 50 percent of the total gross income of such 
     entity is derived from the active conduct of a qualified 
     business within any low-income community,
       ``(ii) a substantial portion of the use of the tangible 
     property of such entity (whether owned or leased) is within 
     any low-income community,
       ``(iii) a substantial portion of the services performed for 
     such entity by its employees

[[Page 19917]]

     are performed in any low-income community,
       ``(iv) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate 
     unadjusted bases of the property of such entity is 
     attributable to collectibles (as defined in section 
     408(m)(2)) other than collectibles that are held primarily 
     for sale to customers in the ordinary course of such 
     business, and
       ``(v) less than 5 percent of the average of the aggregate 
     unadjusted bases of the property of such entity is 
     attributable to nonqualified financial property (as defined 
     in section 1397B(e)).
       ``(B) Proprietorship.--Such term shall include any business 
     carried on by an individual as a proprietor if such business 
     would meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) were it 
     incorporated.
       ``(C) Portions of business may be qualified active low-
     income community business.--The term `qualified active low-
     income community business' includes any trades or businesses 
     which would qualify as a qualified active low-income 
     community business if such trades or businesses were 
     separately incorporated.
       ``(3) Qualified business.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the term `qualified business' has the meaning given to such 
     term by section 1397B(d); except that--
       ``(A) in lieu of applying paragraph (2)(B) thereof, the 
     rental to others of real property located in any low-income 
     community shall be treated as a qualified business if there 
     are substantial improvements located on such property,
       ``(B) paragraph (3) thereof shall not apply, and
       ``(C) such term shall not include any business if a 
     significant portion of the equity interests in such business 
     are held by any person who holds a significant portion of the 
     equity investments in the community development entity.
       ``(e) Low-Income Community.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `low-income community' means 
     any population census tract if--
       ``(A) the poverty rate for such tract is at least 20 
     percent, or
       ``(B)(i) in the case of a tract not located within a 
     metropolitan area, the median family income for such tract 
     does not exceed 80 percent of statewide median family income, 
     or
       ``(ii) in the case of a tract located within a metropolitan 
     area, the median family income for such tract does not exceed 
     80 percent of the greater of statewide median family income 
     or the metropolitan area median family income.
       ``(2) Areas not within census tracts.--In the case of an 
     area which is not tracted for population census tracts, the 
     equivalent county divisions (as defined by the Bureau of the 
     Census for purposes of defining poverty areas) shall be used 
     for purposes of determining poverty rates and median family 
     income.
       ``(3) Targeted population.--The Secretary may prescribe 
     regulations under which 1 or more targeted populations 
     (within the meaning of section 3(20) of the Riegle Community 
     Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1974 (12 U.S.C. 
     4702(20))) may be treated as low-income communities. Such 
     regulations shall include procedures for identifying the area 
     covered by any such community for purposes of determining 
     entities which are qualified active low-income community 
     businesses with respect to such community.
       ``(f) National Limitation on Amount of Investments 
     Designated.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is a new markets tax credit 
     limitation of $1,200,000,000 for each of calendar years 2000 
     through 2004.
       ``(2) Allocation of limitation.--The limitation under 
     paragraph (1) shall be allocated by the Secretary among 
     qualified community development entities selected by the 
     Secretary. In making allocations under the preceding 
     sentence, the Secretary shall give priority to entities with 
     records of having successfully provided capital or technical 
     assistance to disadvantaged businesses or communities.
       ``(3) Carryover of unused limitation.--If the new markets 
     tax credit limitation for any calendar year exceeds the 
     aggregate amount allocated under paragraph (2) for such year, 
     such limitation for the succeeding calendar year shall be 
     increased by the amount of such excess.
       ``(g) Recapture of Credit in Certain Cases.--
       ``(1) In general.--If, at any time during the 7-year period 
     beginning on the date of the original issue of a qualified 
     equity investment in a qualified community development 
     entity, there is a recapture event with respect to such 
     investment, then the tax imposed by this chapter for the 
     taxable year in which such event occurs shall be increased by 
     the credit recapture amount.
       ``(2) Credit recapture amount.--For purposes of paragraph 
     (1), the credit recapture amount is an amount equal to the 
     sum of--
       ``(A) the aggregate decrease in the credits allowed to the 
     taxpayer under section 38 for all prior taxable years which 
     would have resulted if no credit had been determined under 
     this section with respect to such investment, plus
       ``(B) interest at the overpayment rate established under 
     section 6621 on the amount determined under subparagraph (A) 
     for each prior taxable year for the period beginning on the 
     due date for filing the return for the prior taxable year 
     involved.

     No deduction shall be allowed under this chapter for interest 
     described in subparagraph (B).
       ``(3) Recapture event.--For purposes of paragraph (1), 
     there is a recapture event with respect to an equity 
     investment in a qualified community development entity if--
       ``(A) such entity ceases to be a qualified community 
     development entity,
       ``(B) the proceeds of the investment cease to be used as 
     required of subsection (b)(1)(B), or
       ``(C) such investment is redeemed by such entity.
       ``(4) Special rules.--
       ``(A) Tax benefit rule.--The tax for the taxable year shall 
     be increased under paragraph (1) only with respect to credits 
     allowed by reason of this section which were used to reduce 
     tax liability. In the case of credits not so used to reduce 
     tax liability, the carryforwards and carrybacks under section 
     39 shall be appropriately adjusted.
       ``(B) No credits against tax.--Any increase in tax under 
     this subsection shall not be treated as a tax imposed by this 
     chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit 
     under this chapter or for purposes of section 55.
       ``(h) Basis Reduction.--The basis of any qualified equity 
     investment shall be reduced by the amount of any credit 
     determined under this section with respect to such 
     investment.
       ``(i) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be appropriate to carry out this section, 
     including regulations--
       ``(1) which limit the credit for investments which are 
     directly or indirectly subsidized by other Federal benefits 
     (including the credit under section 42 and the exclusion from 
     gross income under section 103),
       ``(2) which prevent the abuse of the provisions of this 
     section through the use of related parties,
       ``(3) which impose appropriate reporting requirements
       ``(4) which apply the provisions of this section to newly 
     formed entities.''
       (b) Credit Made Part of General Business Credit.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (b) of section 38 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``plus'' 
     at the end of paragraph (12), by striking the period at the 
     end of paragraph (13) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding 
     at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(14) the new markets tax credit determined under section 
     45D(a).''
       (2) Limitation on carryback.--Subsection (d) of section 39 
     of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(10) No carryback of new markets tax credit before 
     january 1, 2000.--No portion of the unused business credit 
     for any taxable year which is attributable to the credit 
     under section 45D may be carried back to a taxable year 
     ending before January 1, 2000.''
       (c) Deduction for Unused Credit.--Subsection (c) of section 
     196 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (7), by striking the 
     period at the end of paragraph (8) and inserting ``, and'', 
     and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(9) the new markets tax credit determined under section 
     45D(a).''
       (d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 45D. New markets tax credit.''
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to investments made after December 31, 1999.

  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator 
Rockefeller, in introducing the New Markets Tax Credit Act, innovative 
legislation that will benefit both rural and urban America.
  As its name suggests, the New Markets bill is designed to create new 
markets within our nation for investment, for job growth, and for 
renewal. While most of the nation experiences record economic growth, 
there are some places that have been left behind. Too many communities 
in both rural and urban America haven't been able to share the wealth, 
and without willing investors, that wealth may never come. Capitalism 
cannot flourish where there is no capital. This legislation we're 
introducing today addresses the need for investment in all our 
communities, and I believe the tax credits contained in this bill 
provide a way for America to lift as it climbs.
  Under this bill, tax credits would be allocated to Community 
Development Entities located within the neighborhoods and rural areas 
where help is needed. Those who invest in these Community Development 
organizations

[[Page 19918]]

would receive tax benefits, and the funds they invested would be used 
by the organizations to invest in local businesses, provide start-up 
capital, or make low interest loans. The investment decisions would be 
made at the local level by those who best know the community, would 
attract private enterprise to create economic growth, and would use 
federal tax credits to achieve these objectives. This local, federal, 
and private sector partnership holds the key to improving communities 
across this nation.
  The New Markets Initiative can use both the business incubator and 
community action models that have proven so successful in many 
communities. An example of such success can be found at People, 
Incorporated in Southwest Virginia, a community action agency that 
promotes economic growth by leveraging funds and lending expertise to 
new or expanding businesses.
  This legislation, along with the Enterprise Zone bill I recently 
introduced, gives lcoal communities the tools they need to spur 
economic growth where they live. Attracting investments to the neediest 
communities will pay dividends, not just in economic terms, but in 
quality of life terms as well. Prospering communities can provide 
quality education, improved transportation and better police 
protection. And improving communities can provide a draw for those who 
would otherwise be tempted to move out to the suburbs, thereby reducing 
the pressures that have created suburban sprawl and increasing commutes 
and diminishing open spaces.
  Mr. President, I hope we can move this legislation quickly.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED:
  S. 1527. A bill to amend section 258 of the Communications Act of 
1934 to enhance the protections against unauthorized changes in 
subscriber selections of telephones service providers, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


                     THE ANTI-SLAMMING ACT OF 1999

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to make a few comments 
concerning legislation which I am introducing to deal with the problem 
of slamming.
  Telephone ``slamming'' is the illegal practice of switching a 
consumer's long distance service without the individual's consent. This 
problem has increased dramatically over the last several years, as 
competition between long distance carriers has risen, and slamming is 
the top consumer complaint lodged at the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC), with 11,278 reported complaints in 1995, and 16,500 
in 1996. In both 1997 and 1998, more than 20,000 complaints were filed. 
It is very clear that this problem is on the rise, and unfortunately, 
this represents only the tip of the iceberg because most consumers 
never report violations to the FCC. One regional Bell company estimates 
that 1 in every 20 switches is fraudulent. Media reports indicate that 
as many as 1 million illegal transfers occur annually. Thus, slamming 
threatens to rob consumers of the benefit of a competitive market, 
which is now composed of over 500 companies which generate $72.5 
billion in revenues. As a result of slamming, consumers face not only 
higher phone bills, but also the significant expenditure of time and 
energy in attempting to identify and reverse the fraud. The results of 
slamming are clear: higher phone bills and immense consumer 
frustration.
  Mr. President, we are all aware of the stiff competition which occurs 
for customers in the long distance telephone service industry. The goal 
of deregulating the telecommunications industry was to allow consumers 
to easily avail themselves of lower prices and better service. 
Hopefully, this option will soon be presented to consumers for in-state 
calls and local phone service. Indeed, better service at lower cost is 
a main objective of those who seek to deregulate the utility industry. 
Unfortunately, fraud threatens to rob many consumers of the benefits of 
a competitive industry.
  Telemarketing is one of the least expensive and most effective forms 
of marketing, and it has exponentially expanded in recent years. By 
statute, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulates most 
telemarketing, prohibiting deceptive or abusive sales calls, requiring 
that homes not be called at certain times, and that companies honor a 
consumer's request not to be called again. The law mandates that 
records concerning sales be maintained for two years. While the FTC is 
charged with primary enforcement, the law allows consumers, or state 
Attorneys General on their behalf, to bring legal action against 
violators. Yet, phone companies are exempt from these regulations, 
since they are subject to FCC regulation.
  While the FCC has brought action against twenty-two of the industry's 
largest and smallest firms for slamming violations with penalties 
totaling over $1.8 million, this represents a minute fraction of the 
violations. FCC prosecution does not effectively address or deter this 
serious fraud. State officials have become more aggressive in pursuing 
violators. The California Public Utility Commission fined a company $2 
million in 1997 after 56,000 complaints were filed against it. Arizona, 
Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, 
New Jersey, Ohio, Vermont, and Wisconsin have all pursued litigation 
against slammers. Public officials of twenty-five states asked the FCC 
to adopt tougher rules against slammers.
  As directed by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has moved 
to close several loopholes which have allowed slamming to continue 
unabated. Most important, the FCC has proposed to eliminate the 
financial incentive which encourages many companies to slam by 
mandating that customers who are slammed do not have to pay fees to 
slammers for the first thirty days after the switch occurred. At 
present, a slammer can retain the profits generated from an illegal 
switch. Additionally, the FCC has proposed regulations which would 
require that a carrier confirm all switches generated by telemarketing 
through either (1) a letter of agency, known as a LOA, from the 
consumer; (2) a recording of the consumer verifying his or her choice 
on a toll-free line provided by the carrier; or (3) a record of 
verification by an appropriately qualified and independent third party. 
The regulations, which were recently finalized by the FCC, 
unfortunately have been blocked by court order until long distance 
carriers have time to analyze the implications of the rules. If and 
when these rules are finalized, I still believe that these remedies 
will be wholly inadequate to address the ever-increasing problem of 
slamming. The problem is that slammed consumers would still be left 
without conclusive proof that their consent was properly obtained and 
verified.
  My legislation encompasses a three-part approach to stop slamming by 
strengthening the procedures used to verify consent obtained by 
marketers; increasing enforcement procedures by allowing citizens or 
their representatives to pursue slammers in court with the evidence 
necessary to win; and encouraging all stakeholders to use emerging 
technology to prevent fraud.
  Mr. President, let me also thank the National Association of 
Attorneys General, the National Association of Regulatory Utility 
Commissioners which through both their national offices and individual 
members provided extensive recommendations to improve this bill. 
Additionally, I have found extremely helpful the input of several 
groups which advocate on behalf of consumers. I was particularly 
pleased to work with the Consumer Federation of America to address 
concerns which its members expressed.
  Mr. President, let me take a few minutes to outline the specific 
provisions of my bill. My legislation requires that a consumer's 
consent to change service is verified so that discrepancies can be 
adjudicated quickly and efficiently. Like the 1996 Act, my bill 
requires a legal switch to include verification. However, my 
legislation enumerates the necessary elements of a valid verification. 
First, the bill requires verification to be maintained by the provider, 
either in the form of a letter from the consumer or by recording

[[Page 19919]]

verification of the consumer's consent via the phone. The length that 
the verification must be maintained is to be determined by the FCC. 
Second, the bill stipulates the form that verification must take. 
Written verification remains the same as current regulations. Oral 
verification must include the voice of the subscriber affirmatively 
demonstrating that she wants her long distance provider to be changed; 
is authorized to make the change; and is currently verifying an 
imminent switch. The bill mandates oral verification to be conducted in 
a separate call from that of the telemarketer, by an independent, 
disinterested party. This verifying call must promptly disclose the 
nature and purpose of the call. Third, after a change has been 
executed, the new service provider must send a letter to the consumer, 
within five business days of the change in service, informing the 
consumer that the change, which he requested and verified, has been 
effected. Fourth, the bill mandates that a copy of verification be 
provided to the consumer upon request. Finally, the bill requires the 
FCC to finalize rules implementing these mandates within nine months of 
enactment of the bill.
  These procedures should help ensure that consumers can efficiently 
avail themselves of the phone service they seek, without being exposed 
to random and undetectable fraudulent switches. If an individual is 
switched without his or her consent, the mandate of recorded, 
maintained verification will provide the consumer with the proof 
necessary to prove that the switch was illegal.
  The second main provision of my legislation would provide consumers, 
or their public representatives, a legal right to pursue violators in 
court. Following the model of Senator Hollings' 1991 Telephone Consumer 
Protection Act, my bill provides aggrieved consumers with a private 
right of action in any state court which allows, under specific 
slamming laws or more general consumer protection statutes such an 
action. The 1991 Act has been adjudicated to withstand constitutional 
challenges on both equal protection and tenth amendment claims. Thus, 
the bill has the benefit of specifying one forum in which to resolve 
illegal switches of all types of service: long distance, in-state, and 
local service.
  Realizing that many individuals will not have the time, resources, or 
inclination to pursue a civil action, my bill also allows state 
Attorneys Generals, or other officials authorized by state law, to 
bring an action on behalf of citizens. Like the private right of action 
in suits brought by public officials damages are statutorily set at 
$1,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater. Treble damages are 
awarded in cases of knowing or willful violations. In addition to 
monetary awards, states are entitled to seek relief in the form of 
writs of mandamus, injunction, or similar relief. To ensure a proper 
role for the FCC, state actions must be brought in a federal district 
court where the victim or defendant resides. Additionally, state 
actions must be certified with the Commission, which maintains a right 
to intervening in an action. The bill makes express the fact that it 
has no impact on state authority to investigate consumer fraud or bring 
legal action under any state law.
  Finally, Mr. President, my legislation recognizes that neither 
legislators nor regulators can solve tomorrow's problems with today's 
technology. Therefore, my bill mandates that the FCC provide Congress 
with a report on other, less burdensome but more secure means of 
obtaining and recording consumer consent. Such methods might include 
utilization of Internet technology or issuing PIN numbers or customer 
codes to be used before carrier changes are authorized. The bill 
requires that the FCC report to Congress on such methodology not later 
than 180 days after enactment of this bill.
  Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to discuss my initiative 
to stop slamming. Last year we came close to passing significant anti-
slamming legislation. I hope that this issue can be addressed quickly 
this Congress. As a result, I would urge all my colleagues to cosponsor 
this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1527

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

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS; PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) As the telecommunications industry has moved toward 
     competition in the provision of long distance telephone 
     services, consumers have increasingly elected to change the 
     carriers that provide their long distance telephone services. 
     As many as 50,000,000 consumers now change long distance 
     telephone service providers each year.
       (2) The fluid nature of the market for long distance 
     telephone services has also allowed an increasing number of 
     unauthorized changes of telephone service providers to occur. 
     Such changes have been called ``slamming'', a term which 
     denotes any practice in which a consumer's long distance 
     telephone service provider is changed without the consumer's 
     knowledge or consent.
       (3) Slamming accounts for the largest number of consumer 
     complaints received by the Common Carrier Bureau of the 
     Federal Communications Commission. As many as 1,000,000 
     consumers are subject to the unauthorized change of telephone 
     service providers each year.
       (4) The increased costs which consumers face as a result of 
     the unauthorized change of telephone service providers 
     threaten to deprive consumers of the financial benefits 
     created by a competitive marketplace in telephone services.
       (5) The burdens placed upon consumers by unauthorized 
     changes of telephone service providers will expand 
     exponentially as competition enters into the markets for 
     intraLATA and local telephone services.
       (6) The Telecommunications Act of 1996 sought to combat 
     unauthorized changes of telephone service providers by 
     requiring that a provider who changes a subscriber without 
     authorization pay the previously selected carrier an amount 
     equal to all charges paid by the subscriber after the change. 
     The Federal Communications Commission has proposed 
     regulations to implement this requirement. Implementing these 
     regulations will eliminate many of the financial incentives 
     to execute unauthorized changes of telephone service 
     providers. However, under current and proposed regulations 
     consumers have, and will continue to face, difficulty in 
     securing proof of unauthorized changes. Thus, enforcement of 
     the regulations will be impeded by a lack of tangible proof 
     of consumer consent to the change of telephone service 
     providers.
       (7) The interests of consumers require that telephone 
     service providers maintain evidence of their verification of 
     consumer consent to changes in telephone service providers. 
     This evidence should take the form of a consumer's written 
     consent or a recording of a consumer's oral consent obtained 
     by the telephone service provider or a third party.
       (8) Both Congress and the Federal Communications Commission 
     should continue to examine electronic means by which 
     consumers could most readily change telephone service 
     providers while ensuring that such changes would result only 
     from consumer action evidencing express consent to such 
     changes.
       (9) By providing consumers with a private right of action 
     in State court, if State law permits, against those who have 
     executed unauthorized changes of telephone service providers, 
     Congress insures in a constitutional manner that neither 
     Federal nor State courts will be overburdened with 
     litigation, while also providing the proper forum for such 
     actions given that competition will soon come to all segments 
     of the telephone service market.
       (10) The majority of consumers who have been subject to the 
     unauthorized change of telephone service do not seek redress 
     through the Federal Communications Commission. In light of 
     the general responsibilities of the States for consumer 
     protection, as well as the prosecutions against unauthorized 
     changes already undertaken by the States, it is essential 
     that the States be allowed to pursue actions on behalf of 
     their citizens, while also preserving the proper role of the 
     Federal Communications Commission in regulating the 
     telecommunications industry.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to protect consumers from unauthorized changes of 
     telephone service providers;
       (2) to allow the efficient prosecution of legal actions 
     against telephone service providers who defraud consumers by 
     transferring telephone service providers without consumer 
     consent; and
       (3) to facilitate the ready selection of telephone service 
     providers by consumers.

     SEC. 2. ENHANCEMENT OF PROTECTIONS AGAINST UNAUTHORIZED 
                   CHANGES IN SUBSCRIBER SELECTIONS OF TELEPHONE 
                   SERVICE PROVIDERS.

       (a) Verification of Authorization.--

[[Page 19920]]

       (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 258 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 258) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``(a) Prohibition.--No telecommunications'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(a) Prohibition.--
       ``(1) In general.--No telecommunications'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), as so designated, by inserting after 
     the first sentence the following: ``Such procedures shall 
     require the verification of a subscriber's selection of a 
     provider in written or oral form (including a signature or 
     voice recording) and shall require the retention of such 
     verification in such manner and form and for such time as the 
     Commission considers appropriate.''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Verification.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the 
     verification of a subscriber's selection of a telephone 
     exchange service or telephone toll service provider shall 
     take the form of a written or oral communication (in the same 
     language as the solicitation of the selection) in which the 
     subscriber--
       ``(i) acknowledges the type of service to be changed as a 
     result of the selection;
       ``(ii) affirms the subscriber's intent to select the 
     provider as the provider of that service;
       ``(iii) affirms that the subscriber is authorized to select 
     the provider of that service for the telephone number in 
     question;
       ``(iv) acknowledges that the selection of the provider will 
     result in a change in providers of that service;
       ``(v) acknowledges that only one provider may provide that 
     service for that telephone number; and
       ``(vi) provides such other information as the Commission 
     considers appropriate for the protection of the subscriber.
       ``(B) Requirements for oral verifications.--An oral 
     verification of a change in telephone service providers under 
     this paragraph--
       ``(i) may not be made in the same communication in which 
     the change is solicited;
       ``(ii) may be made only to a qualified and independent 
     agent (as determined in accordance with regulations 
     prescribed by the Commission) of the provider concerned; and
       ``(iii) shall include a prompt and clear disclosure by the 
     agent that the purpose of the telephone call is to verify 
     that the subscriber has consented to the change.
       ``(C) Confirmation of change.--A provider submitting or 
     executing a change in telephone service providers shall 
     notify the subscriber concerned by mail of the change not 
     later than 5 business days after the date on which the change 
     is executed. The confirmation shall be provided in the 
     language in which the change was solicited.
       ``(D) Availability of verifications.--A provider shall make 
     available to a subscriber a copy of a verification under this 
     paragraph upon the request of the subscriber or an authorized 
     representative of the subscriber.''.
       (2) Regulations.--The Federal Communications Commission 
     shall complete the adoption of the regulations required under 
     section 258(a) of the Communications Act of 1934 by reason of 
     the amendments made by paragraph (1) not later than 270 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Additional Remedies.--Such section is further amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Private Right of Action.--
       ``(1) Private right.--A person or entity may, if otherwise 
     permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, bring in 
     an appropriate court of that State--
       ``(A) an action based on a violation of subsection (a) or 
     the regulations prescribed under such subsection to enjoin 
     such violation;
       ``(B) an action to recover for actual monetary loss from 
     such a violation or to receive $1,000 in damages for each 
     such violation, whichever is greater; or
       ``(C) both such actions.
       ``(2) Treble damages.--If the court finds that the 
     defendant willfully or knowingly violated subsection (a) or 
     the regulations prescribed under such subsection, the court 
     may, in its discretion, increase the amount of the award to 
     an amount equal to not more than 3 times the amount available 
     under paragraph (1)(B).
       ``(3) Costs of litigation.--The court, in issuing any final 
     order in an action brought pursuant to this subsection may 
     award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorney and 
     expert witness fees) to the prevailing plaintiff whenever the 
     court determines that such award is appropriate.
       ``(d) Actions by States.--
       ``(1) Authority of states.--
       ``(A) In general.--Whenever the attorney general of a 
     State, or an official or agency designated by a State, has 
     reason to believe that any person has engaged or is engaging 
     in an activity or practice of activities with respect to 
     residents of that State in violation of subsection (a) or the 
     regulations prescribed under such subsection, the State may 
     bring a civil action on behalf of its residents to enjoin 
     such activities, an action to recover for the greater of 
     actual monetary loss or $1,000 in damages for each violation, 
     or both such actions.
       ``(B) Treble damages.--If the court finds the defendant 
     willfully or knowingly violated such subsection or 
     regulations, the court may, in its discretion, increase the 
     amount of the award to an amount equal to not more than 3 
     times the amount available under the subparagraph (A).
       ``(2) Exclusive jurisdiction of federal courts.--
       ``(A) In general.--The district courts of the United 
     States, the United States courts of any territory, and the 
     District Court of the United States for the District of 
     Columbia shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all civil 
     actions brought under this subsection.
       ``(B) Additional relief.--Upon proper application, such 
     courts shall also have jurisdiction to issue writs of 
     mandamus, or orders affording like relief, commanding the 
     defendant to comply with the provisions of subsection (a) or 
     regulations prescribed under such subsection, including the 
     requirement that the defendant take such action as is 
     necessary to remove the danger of such violation. Upon a 
     proper showing, a permanent or temporary injunction or 
     restraining order shall be granted without bond.
       ``(3) Rights of commission.--
       ``(A) Notice.--The State shall serve prior written notice 
     of any such civil action upon the Commission and provide the 
     Commission with a copy of its complaint, except in any case 
     where such prior notice is not feasible, in which case the 
     State shall serve such notice immediately upon instituting 
     such action.
       ``(B) Rights.--The Commission shall have the right--
       ``(i) to intervene in any action covered by subparagraph 
     (A);
       ``(ii) upon so intervening, to be heard on all matters 
     arising therein; and
       ``(iii) to file petitions for appeal.
       ``(4) Venue; service of process.--Any civil action brought 
     under this subsection in a district court of the United 
     States may be brought in the district wherein the defendant 
     or victim is found, wherein the defendant is an inhabitant or 
     transacts business, or wherein the violation occurred or is 
     occurring, and process in such cases may be served in any 
     district in which the defendant is an inhabitant or where the 
     defendant may be found.
       ``(5) Investigatory powers.--For purposes of bringing a 
     civil action under this subsection, nothing in this 
     subsection shall prevent the attorney general of a State, or 
     an official or agency designated by a State, from exercising 
     the powers conferred on the attorney general or such official 
     by the laws of such State to conduct investigations or to 
     administer oaths or affirmations or to compel the attendance 
     of witnesses or the production of documentary and other 
     evidence.
       ``(6) Effect on state court proceedings.--Nothing in this 
     subsection shall be construed to prohibit any official 
     authorized by State law from proceeding in State court on the 
     basis of an alleged violation of any civil or criminal 
     statute of such State.
       ``(7) Limitation.--Whenever the Commission has instituted a 
     civil action for violation of subsection (a) or there 
     regulations prescribed under such subsection, no State may, 
     during the pendency of such action instituted by the 
     Commission, subsequently institute a civil action against any 
     defendant named in the Commission's complaint for any 
     violation as alleged in the Commission's complaint.
       ``(8) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `attorney 
     general' means the chief legal officer of a State.''.

     SEC. 3. REPORT ON ELECTRONIC MEANS FOR VERIFYING SUBSCRIBER 
                   AUTHORIZATIONS OF SELECTIONS OF TELEPHONE 
                   SERVICE PROVIDERS.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the technological feasibility and 
     practicability of permitting subscribers to authorize changes 
     in telephone service providers by electronic means (including 
     authorization by electronic mail or by use of personal 
     identification numbers or other security mechanisms) without 
     thereby increasing the likelihood of unauthorized changes in 
     such providers.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LOTT (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Chafee, Mrs. Lincoln, 
        Mr. Warner, and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 1528. A bill to amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 to clarify liability under that 
Act for certain recycling transactions; to the Committee on Environment 
and Public Works.


                    SUPERFUND RECYCLING ACT OF 1999

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join my distinguished 
colleagues, Senate Minority Leader Daschle, and Senators Warner, 
Chafee, Baucus, and Lincoln, in introducing the Superfund Recycling 
Equity Act of 1999.
  This legislation, similar to that which the distinguished minority 
leader and I introduced in the previous Congress, removes an unintended 
consequence of the Superfund statute that

[[Page 19921]]

has inhibited the growth of recycling in our nation. I am certain that 
when the Congress passed the Comprehensive Emergency Response, 
Liability and Compensation Act (CERCLA), members of both bodies did not 
want, and did not suggest, that traditional recyclable materials--
paper, glass, plastic, metals, textiles, and rubber--should be any more 
subject to Superfund liability than a competitive product made of 
virgin material. However, that is how the courts have interpreted 
Superfund.
  Consequently, CERCLA has created a competitive disadvantage between 
virgin materials used as manufacturing feedstocks and recyclable 
materials used for precisely the same purpose. The courts have 
concluded that recyclables are materials that have been disposed of and 
are therefore subject to Superfund liability. Even most American 
schoolchildren know, recycling is good for the nation--that recycling 
is the exact opposite of disposal. Recycling serves important national 
goals by keeping materials from entering the waste stream. Through 
recycling we reclaim useful products and materials. We use recyclables 
as manufacturing feedstocks just as we do virgin raw materials, but 
using recyclables also helps to preserve the earth's scarce resources, 
reduces society's energy demand, lowers water and air pollution and 
reduces solid waste.
  Mr. President, our bill corrects this unintended consequence of 
Superfund. It recognizes that recycling is not disposal. That recyclers 
are not subject to Superfund's liability scheme should the owners of 
mills, foundries or refineries, to which recyclers ship their material, 
contaminate their facilities.
  Let me highlight an example of the unintended consequence that will 
continue to exist without this needed clarification. A recycler sends 
scrap metal as feedstock to be manufactured into a new product at a 
mill. The same mill also uses virgin metals to make the identical 
product. If the mill contaminates its facility with a hazardous 
substance, only the recyclable becomes subject to Superfund liability. 
Because recyclables are considered solid wastes, the recycler's actions 
are considered arranging for disposal, thus creating liability. 
However, the shipper of the virgin material is not liable under 
Superfund since it shipped a product and did not ``arrange for 
disposal.''
  The Superfund Recycling Equity Act of 1999 is essential to correct 
Superfund's unintended bias against recycling. It will provide the same 
relief from Superfund liability for legitimate recyclers as that 
enjoyed by those who sell virgin materials. It will also ensure that, 
sham recyclers will not benefit from the provisions of this bill. The 
Superfund Recycling Equity Act contains conditions that can only be met 
by legitimate recyclers of paper, glass, plastic, metals, textiles and 
rubber. And, to be free of liability, recyclers must act in an 
environmentally sound manner and sell their product to manufacturers 
with environmentally responsible business practices.
  It is also important to note what this bill will not do. It will not 
relieve from liability any recycler who has contaminated his own 
facility. Nor will it assist recyclers who have disposed of waste at 
landfills or other places at which waste was the cause of a release of 
hazardous substances to a site that is addressed by the Superfund 
program.
  Mr. President, the Senate Minority Leader and I previously stated our 
intention that, should a more comprehensive Superfund bill fail to move 
toward conclusion in the Senate, we would work in a bipartisan fashion, 
toward the goal of Superfund relief for legitimate recyclers in the 
1999 session of this Congress. Members of the Environment and Public 
Works, led by Chairman Chafee, Subcommittee Chairman Smith, and Ranking 
Minority Member Baucus, have worked extraordinarily hard to try to 
bring a common sense Superfund bill to the Senate floor that addresses 
a series of issues, including relief for recyclers. Unfortunately, once 
again, differences appear to have stymied that effort. I congratulate 
my colleagues for their efforts to address this issue. However, 
realizing the chances of passing a more comprehensive Superfund reform 
bill are now somewhat remote, it is time to address the Superfund 
recycling issue.
  The language offered today is similar to the bipartisan measure we 
introduced last year. In the last Congress, the Minority Leader and I 
were joined by 63 of our colleagues across party and ideological lines 
in support of the Superfund Recycling Equity Act (S. 2180). It is now 
time to complete our work and provide relief--relief for recyclers that 
is long overdue.
  There is one remaining issue regarding polychlorinated biphenyls 
(PCBs) in recycled paper which has been the subject of negotiations 
between various parties and the Administration. It is my understanding 
that these parties are negotiating in good faith, and that many, but 
not all issues, have been resolved. I have said in the past, I would be 
willing to modify the Superfund recycling language if the original 
negotiating partners agreed to a proposed language change. That remains 
my position. Should there be an agreement among the original 
negotiators on the paper PCB issue subsequent to today's introduction, 
I will at the earliest appropriate moment make the agreed upon change.
  Mr. President, Americans have properly embraced the benefits of 
recycling. Americans know that increased recycling means more efficient 
use of natural resources and a meaningful reduction in solid waste. By 
removing the threat of Superfund liability for recyclers, Congress will 
stimulate more recycling. I urge all of my colleagues to cosponsor this 
pro-environment bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1528

       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 ``Superfund Recycling Equity 
     Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to promote the reuse and recycling of scrap material in 
     furtherance of the goals of waste minimization and natural 
     resource conservation while protecting human health and the 
     environment;
       (2) to create greater equity in the statutory treatment of 
     recycled versus virgin materials; and
       (3) to remove the disincentives and impediments to 
     recycling created as an unintended consequence of the 1980 
     Superfund liability provisions.

     SEC. 3. CLARIFICATION OF LIABILITY UNDER CERCLA FOR RECYCLING 
                   TRANSACTIONS.

       (a) Clarification.--Title I of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 127. RECYCLING TRANSACTIONS.

       ``(a) Liability Clarification.--As provided in subsections 
     (b), (c), (d), and (e), a person who arranged for recycling 
     of recyclable material shall not be liable under section 
     107(a)(3) or 107(a)(4) with respect to the material.
       ``(b) Recyclable Material Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term `recyclable material' means scrap paper, 
     scrap plastic, scrap glass, scrap textiles, scrap rubber 
     (other than whole tires), scrap metal, or spent lead-acid, 
     spent nickel-cadmium, and other spent batteries, as well as 
     minor amounts of material incident to or adhering to the 
     scrap material as a result of its normal and customary use 
     prior to becoming scrap; except that such term shall not 
     include shipping containers of a capacity from 30 liters to 
     3,000 liters, whether intact or not, having any hazardous 
     substance (but not metal bits and pieces or hazardous 
     substance that form an integral part of the container) 
     contained in or adhering thereto.
       ``(c) Transactions Involving Scrap Paper, Plastic, Glass, 
     Textiles, or Rubber.--Transactions involving scrap paper, 
     scrap plastic, scrap glass, scrap textiles, or scrap rubber 
     (other than whole tires) shall be deemed to be arranging for 
     recycling if the person who arranged for the transaction (by 
     selling recyclable material or otherwise arranging for the 
     recycling of recyclable material) can demonstrate by a 
     preponderance of the evidence that all of the following 
     criteria were met at the time of the transaction:
       ``(1) The recyclable material met a commercial 
     specification grade.
       ``(2) A market existed for the recyclable material.
       ``(3) A substantial portion of the recyclable material was 
     made available for use as feedstock for the manufacture of a 
     new saleable product.

[[Page 19922]]

       ``(4) The recyclable material could have been a replacement 
     or substitute for a virgin raw material, or the product to be 
     made from the recyclable material could have been a 
     replacement or substitute for a product made, in whole or in 
     part, from a virgin raw material.
       ``(5) For transactions occurring 90 days or more after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the person exercised 
     reasonable care to determine that the facility where the 
     recyclable material was handled, processed, reclaimed, or 
     otherwise managed by another person (hereinafter in this 
     section referred to as a `consuming facility') was in 
     compliance with substantive (not procedural or 
     administrative) provisions of any Federal, State, or local 
     environmental law or regulation, or compliance order or 
     decree issued pursuant thereto, applicable to the handling, 
     processing, reclamation, storage, or other management 
     activities associated with recyclable material.
       ``(6) For purposes of this subsection, `reasonable care' 
     shall be determined using criteria that include (but are not 
     limited to)--
       ``(A) the price paid in the recycling transaction;
       ``(B) the ability of the person to detect the nature of the 
     consuming facility's operations concerning its handling, 
     processing, reclamation, or other management activities 
     associated with recyclable material; and
       ``(C) the result of inquiries made to the appropriate 
     Federal, State, or local environmental agency (or agencies) 
     regarding the consuming facility's past and current 
     compliance with substantive (not procedural or 
     administrative) provisions of any Federal, State, or local 
     environmental law or regulation, or compliance order or 
     decree issued pursuant thereto, applicable to the handling, 
     processing, reclamation, storage, or other management 
     activities associated with the recyclable material. For the 
     purposes of this paragraph, a requirement to obtain a permit 
     applicable to the handling, processing, reclamation, or other 
     management activity associated with the recyclable materials 
     shall be deemed to be a substantive provision.
       ``(d) Transactions Involving Scrap Metal.--
       ``(1) Transactions involving scrap metal shall be deemed to 
     be arranging for recycling if the person who arranged for the 
     transaction (by selling recyclable material or otherwise 
     arranging for the recycling of recyclable material) can 
     demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that at the 
     time of the transaction--
       ``(A) the person met the criteria set forth in subsection 
     (c) with respect to the scrap metal;
       ``(B) the person was in compliance with any applicable 
     regulations or standards regarding the storage, transport, 
     management, or other activities associated with the recycling 
     of scrap metal that the Administrator promulgates under the 
     Solid Waste Disposal Act subsequent to the enactment of this 
     section and with regard to transactions occurring after the 
     effective date of such regulations or standards; and
       ``(C) the person did not melt the scrap metal prior to the 
     transaction.
       ``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(C), melting of scrap 
     metal does not include the thermal separation of 2 or more 
     materials due to differences in their melting points 
     (referred to as `sweating').
       ``(3) For purposes of this subsection, the term `scrap 
     metal' means bits and pieces of metal parts (e.g., bars, 
     turnings, rods, sheets, wire) or metal pieces that may be 
     combined together with bolts or soldering (e.g., radiators, 
     scrap automobiles, railroad box cars), which when worn or 
     superfluous can be recycled, except for scrap metals that the 
     Administrator excludes from this definition by regulation.
       ``(e) Transactions Involving Batteries.--Transactions 
     involving spent lead-acid batteries, spent nickel-cadmium 
     batteries, or other spent batteries shall be deemed to be 
     arranging for recycling if the person who arranged for the 
     transaction (by selling recyclable material or otherwise 
     arranging for the recycling of recyclable material) can 
     demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that at the 
     time of the transaction--
       ``(1) the person met the criteria set forth in subsection 
     (c) with respect to the spent lead-acid batteries, spent 
     nickel-cadmium batteries, or other spent batteries, but the 
     person did not recover the valuable components of such 
     batteries; and
       ``(2)(A) with respect to transactions involving lead-acid 
     batteries, the person was in compliance with applicable 
     Federal environmental regulations or standards, and any 
     amendments thereto, regarding the storage, transport, 
     management, or other activities associated with the recycling 
     of spent lead-acid batteries;
       ``(B) with respect to transactions involving nickel-cadmium 
     batteries, Federal environmental regulations or standards are 
     in effect regarding the storage, transport, management, or 
     other activities associated with the recycling of spent 
     nickel-cadmium batteries, and the person was in compliance 
     with applicable regulations or standards or any amendments 
     thereto; or
       ``(C) with respect to transactions involving other spent 
     batteries, Federal environmental regulations or standards are 
     in effect regarding the storage, transport, management, or 
     other activities associated with the recycling of such 
     batteries, and the person was in compliance with applicable 
     regulations or standards or any amendments thereto.
       ``(f) Exclusions.--
       ``(1) The exemptions set forth in subsections (c), (d), and 
     (e) shall not apply if--
       ``(A) the person had an objectively reasonable basis to 
     believe at the time of the recycling transaction--
       ``(i) that the recyclable material would not be recycled;
       ``(ii) that the recyclable material would be burned as 
     fuel, or for energy recovery or incineration; or
       ``(iii) for transactions occurring before 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this section, that the consuming 
     facility was not in compliance with a substantive (not 
     procedural or administrative) provision of any Federal, 
     State, or local environmental law or regulation, or 
     compliance order or decree issued pursuant thereto, 
     applicable to the handling, processing, reclamation, or other 
     management activities associated with the recyclable 
     material;
       ``(B) the person had reason to believe that hazardous 
     substances had been added to the recyclable material for 
     purposes other than processing for recycling;
       ``(C) the person failed to exercise reasonable care with 
     respect to the management and handling of the recyclable 
     material (including adhering to customary industry practices 
     current at the time of the recycling transaction designed to 
     minimize, through source control, contamination of the 
     recyclable material by hazardous substances); or
       ``(D) with respect to any item of a recyclable material, 
     the item contained polychlorinated biphenyls at a 
     concentration in excess of 50 parts per million or any new 
     standard promulgated pursuant to applicable Federal laws.
       ``(2) For purposes of this subsection, an objectively 
     reasonable basis for belief shall be determined using 
     criteria that include (but are not limited to) the size of 
     the person's business, customary industry practices 
     (including customary industry practices current at the time 
     of the recycling transaction designed to minimize, through 
     source control, contamination of the recyclable material by 
     hazardous substances), the price paid in the recycling 
     transaction, and the ability of the person to detect the 
     nature of the consuming facility's operations concerning its 
     handling, processing, reclamation, or other management 
     activities associated with the recyclable material.
       ``(3) For purposes of this subsection, a requirement to 
     obtain a permit applicable to the handling, processing, 
     reclamation, or other management activities associated with 
     recyclable material shall be deemed to be a substantive 
     provision.
       ``(g) Effect on Other Liability.--Nothing in this section 
     shall be deemed to affect the liability of a person under 
     paragraph (1) or (2) of section 107(a). Nothing in this 
     section shall be deemed to affect the liability of a person 
     under paragraph (3) or (4) of section 107(a) with respect to 
     materials that are not recyclable materials as defined in 
     subsection (b) of this section.
       ``(h) Regulations.--The Administrator has the authority, 
     under section 115, to promulgate additional regulations 
     concerning this section.
       ``(i) Effect on Pending or Concluded Actions.--The 
     exemptions provided in this section shall not affect any 
     concluded judicial or administrative action or any pending 
     judicial action initiated by the United States prior to 
     enactment of this section.
       ``(j) Liability for Attorney's Fees for Certain Actions.--
     Any person who commences an action in contribution against a 
     person who is not liable by operation of this section shall 
     be liable to that person for all reasonable costs of 
     defending that action, including all reasonable attorney's 
     and expert witness fees.
       ``(k) Relationship to Liability Under Other Laws.--Nothing 
     in this section shall affect--
       ``(1) liability under any other Federal, State, or local 
     statute or regulation promulgated pursuant to any such 
     statute, including any requirements promulgated by the 
     Administrator under the Solid Waste Disposal Act; or
       ``(2) the ability of the Administrator to promulgate 
     regulations under any other statute, including the Solid 
     Waste Disposal Act.''.
       (b) Technical Amendment.--The table of contents for title I 
     of such Act is amended by adding at the end the following 
     item:

  ``Sec. 127. Recycling transactions.''.

  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my distinguished 
colleagues in introducing legislation to relieve legitimate recyclers 
from Superfund liability.
  This legislation has become necessary because of an unintended 
consequence of the Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act, more commonly called Superfund. Some courts have 
interpreted CERCLA to mean that the sale

[[Page 19923]]

of certain traditional recyclable feedstocks is an arrangement for the 
treatment or disposal of a hazardous substance and, therefore, fully 
subject to Superfund liability. While there exists in law and 
legislative history no suggestion whatsoever that the Congress intended 
to impede recycling in America by providing a strong preference for the 
use of virgin materials through the Superfund liability scheme, that is 
precisely what has happened.
  The Superfund Recycling Equity Act of 1999 is intended to place 
traditional recyclable materials which are used as feedstocks in the 
manufacturing process on an equal footing with their virgin, or primary 
feedstock, counterparts. Traditional recyclables are made from paper, 
glass, plastic, metals, batteries, textiles, and rubber.
  During the 103rd Congress I first introduced a bill to relieve 
legitimate recyclers of scrap metal from unintended Superfund 
liability. The bill was developed in conjunction with the recycling 
industry, the environmental community, and the Administration. All of 
the parties worked closely together and consistently agreed that 
liability relief for recyclers is necessary and right.
  The language in this bill is the culmination of a process that we 
have been working on since the 103rd Congress. Similar language was 
also introduced in the 104th and 105th Congresses with the most recent 
version garnering almost 400 Senate and House co-sponsors. I am sure 
you can see, Mr. President, the push to relieve these legitimate 
recyclers of this unintended liability has received broad, bi-partisan 
support.
  The Superfund Recycling Equity Act of 1999 acknowledges that Congress 
did not intend to subject to Superfund liability those government and 
private entities that collect and process secondary materials for sale 
as feedstocks for manufacturing. This bill removes from liability those 
who collect, process, and sell to manufacturers paper, glass, plastic, 
metal textiles, and rubber recyclables. This bill also exempts from 
liability those individuals who collect lead acid, nickel, cadmium, and 
other batteries for the recycling of the valuable components. However, 
this bill does not exempt chemical, solvent, sludge, or slag recycling. 
It addresses traditional recyclables in a CERCLA context only. We do 
not intend it to be viewed as a precedent for any other amendment to 
Superfund or to any other environmental statute, whatsoever.
  It should also be clearly understood that this bill addresses the 
product of recyclers, that is the recyclables they sell which are 
utilized to make new products. This does not affect liability for 
contamination that is created at a facility owned or operated by a 
recycler. Neither does it affect liability related to any process 
wastes sent by a recycler for treatment or disposal. In order to assure 
that only bonafide recycling facilities benefit from this bill, a 
number of tests have been established within the bill by which 
liability relief will be denied to sham recyclers.
  I have consistently supported Superfund reforms beginning with my 
time in the House and continuing in the Senate. Unfortunately, 
comprehensive Superfund reforms have yet to garner broad support 
throughout the Congress and action on recyclers has been held up in the 
process. Relief for legitimate recyclers has been the one portion of 
Superfund reform that has consistently garnered widespread, bi-partisan 
support. The recycling industry should no longer be denied their 
legitimate exemption from Superfund liability because of broader issues 
that do not relate to them.
  Mr. President, I am aware of ongoing negotiations concerning a 
section within this recycling bill that applies to PCBs in paper. I 
want to again stress that when we began preparing for this bill in 
1993, we formed a coalition of parties that all agreed upon the 
language within the bill. This coalition has remained until this day. 
These parties are currently working to amend the language of the bill 
to resolve this concern. Upon final agreement, I will welcome an 
amendment to this bill to include the resolution language.
  Mr. President, there are legitimate recyclers across our nation that 
stand to lose their livelihoods if we don't act immediately. Legitimate 
recyclers that reuse and recycle the scrap leftover from our everyday 
processes. Legitimate recyclers that reduce the waste we put in our 
landfills and produce a useful product. Legitimate recyclers that were 
not intended by the writers of CERCLA to be burdened with liability for 
taking scrap metal and other products and processing them into products 
equivalent to virgin material.
  Mr. President, we have been working toward providing this needed 
liability relief for legitimate recyclers for over 6 years. It is time 
to pass this important legislation now. Doing so will not only relieve 
this unintended liability but will promote recycling in our country. I 
urge all my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GREGG:
  S. 1530. A bill to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to 
clarify the Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.


               family and medical leave clarification act

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, today marks the sixth anniversary 
of the implementation of the Family and Medical Leave Act. This act, as 
my colleagues will recall, was intended to be used by families for 
critical periods such as after the birth or adoption of a child and 
leave to care for a child, spouse, or one's own ``serious medical 
condition.''
  Since its passage, the Family and Medical Leave Act has had a 
significant impact on employers' leave practices and policies. 
According to the Commission on Family and Medical Leave two-thirds of 
covered work sites have changed some aspect of their policies in order 
to comply with the act.
  Unfortunately, the Department of Labor's implementation of certain 
provisions of the act has resulted in significant unintended 
administrative burden and costs on employers; resentment by co-workers 
when the act is misapplied; invasions of privacy by requiring employers 
to ask deeply personal questions about employees and family members 
planning to take FMLA leave; disruptions to the workplace due to 
increased unscheduled and unplanned absences; unnecessary record 
keeping; unworkable notice requirements; and conflicts with existing 
policies.
  Despite these problems, which have been well documented through three 
separate congressional hearings, including one I chaired three weeks 
ago, there are those in Congress and the administration who choose to 
ignore those problems and instead push for imposition of the law on 
even smaller businesses and for purposes well beyond those judged by 
Congress to be the most critical. These proponents of expansion will 
refer to a report issued by the U.S. Commission on Leave which failed 
to find significant problems associated with the act.
  However, the fact of the matter is, the Commission on Leave's report 
was issued well before the final implementing regulations were in 
place--regulations which are in fact the source of much of the concern 
over the act's implementation.
  Mr. President, to consider expansion at this time is not just 
irresponsible, it is unconscionable.
  The Department of Labor's vague and confusing implementing 
regulations have resulted in the FMLA being misapplied, misunderstood 
and mistakenly ignored. Employers aren't sure if situations like pink 
eye, ingrown toe nails and even the common cold will be considered by 
the regulators and the courts to be serious health conditions.
  Because of these concerns and well documented problems with the act, 
I am today introducing the Family and Medical Leave Clarification Act 
to make reasonable and much needed changes to clarify the Family and 
Medical Leave Act and restore the original congressional intent.
  The FMLA Clarification Act has the strong support of The Society for 
Human Resource Management and close to 300 leading companies and 
associations who make up the Family

[[Page 19924]]

and Medical Leave Act Technical Corrections Coalition. I have received 
a letter of support from the Coalition and ask that it be printed in 
the Record. This broad based coalition shares my belief that both 
employers and employees would benefit from making certain technical 
corrections to the FMLA--corrections that are needed to restore 
congressional intent and to reduce administrative and compliance 
problems experienced by employers who are making a good faith effort to 
comply with the act.
  The bill I am introducing today does several important things:
  First, it repeals the Department of Labor's current regulations for 
``serious health condition'' and includes language from the Democrats' 
own Committee Report on what types of medical conditions (such as heart 
attacks, strokes, spinal injuries, etc) were intended to be covered.
  In passing the FMLA, Congress stated that the term ``serious health 
condition'' is not intended to cover short-term conditions for which 
treatment and recovery are very brief, recognizing that ``it is 
expected that such condition will fall within the most modest sick 
leave policies.''
  The Department of Labor's current regulations are extremely 
expansive, defining the term ``serious health condition'' as including, 
among other things, any absence of more than 3 days in which the 
employee sees any health care provider and receives any type of 
continuing treatment (including a second doctor's visit, or a 
prescription, or a referral to a physical therapist)--such a broad 
definition potentially mandates FMLA leave where an employee sees a 
health care provider once, receives a prescription drug, and is 
instructed to call the health care provider back if the symptoms do not 
improve; the regulations also define as a ``serious health condition'' 
any absence for a chronic health problem, such as arthritis, asthma, 
diabetes, etc., even if the employee does not see a doctor for that 
absence and is absent for less than three days.
  Second, the bill amends the act's provisions relating to intermittent 
leave to give employers the right to require that intermittent leave be 
taken in minimum blocks of 4 hours. This would minimize the misuse of 
FMLA by employees who use FMLA as an excuse for regular tardiness and 
routine justification for early departures.
  Third, the bill shifts to the employee the responsibility to request 
leave be designated as FMLA leave, and requires the employee to provide 
written application within 5 working days of providing notice to the 
employer for foreseeable leave. With respect to unforeseeable leave, 
the bill requires the employee to provide, at a minimum, oral 
notification of the need for the leave not later than the date the 
leave commences unless the employee is physically or mentally incapable 
of providing notice or submitting the application. Under that 
circumstance the employee is provided such additional time as necessary 
to provide notice.
  Shifting the burden to the employee to request leave be designated as 
FMLA leave eliminates the need for the employer to question the 
employee and pry into the employee's and the employee's family's 
private matters, as required under current law, and helps eliminate 
personal liability for employer supervisors who should not be expected 
to be experts in the vague and complex regulations which even attorneys 
have a difficult time understanding. Under current law, it is the 
employer's responsibility in all circumstances to designate leave, paid 
or unpaid, as FMLA-qualifying. Failure to do so in a timely manner or 
to inform an employee that a specific event does not qualify as FMLA 
leave may result in that unqualified leave becoming qualified leave 
under FMLA. This scenario has actually been upheld in Court and has 
placed an enormous burden on employers to respond within 48 hours of an 
employee's leave request. In addition, the courts have held that there 
is personal liability for employers under the FMLA and that an 
individual manager may be sued and held individually liable for acts 
taken based upon or relating to the FMLA. See Freemon v. Foley, 911 F. 
Supp. 326 (N.D. Ill. 1995) (in case of first impression in 7th Circuit, 
court stated, ``We believe the FMLA extends to all those who controlled 
`in whole or in part' [plaintiff's] ability to take leave of absence 
and return to her postion'').
  Fourth, with respect to leave because of the employee's own serious 
health condition, the bill permits an employer to require the employee 
to choose between taking unpaid leave provided by the FMLA or paid 
absence under an employer's collective bargaining agreement or other 
sick leave, sick pay, or disability plan, program, or policy of the 
employer. This change provides incentive for employers to continue 
their generous sick leave policies while providing a disincentive to 
employers considering getting rid of such employee-friendly plans, 
including those negotiated by the employer and the employee's union 
representative. Paid leave would be subject to the employer's normal 
work rules and procedures for taking such leave, including work rules 
and procedures dealing with attendance requirements.
  Despite the common belief that leave under the FMLA is necessarily 
unpaid, employers having generous sick leave policies, or who have 
worked out employee-friendly sick leave programs with unions in 
collective bargaining agreements, are being penalized by the FMLA. In 
fact, for many companies, most FMLA leave has become paid leave. 
According to the U.S. Commission on Leave, 66.3 percent of FMLA leave 
is paid (46.7 percent fully paid). This existing paid leave sandwiched 
on top of the broad, yet vague, FMLA definitions has resulted in 
employees requesting or characterizing a variety of minor situations as 
FMLA leave.
  Mr. President, the FMLA Clarification Act is a reasonable response to 
the hundreds of concerns that have been raised about the act. It leaves 
in place the fundamental protections of the law while attempting to 
make changes necessary to restore FMLA to its original intent and to 
respond to the very legitimate concerns that have been raised. In the 
spirit of the FMLA I urge my colleagues to mark it's anniversary by 
restoring the Family and Medical Leave Act to its original 
congressional intent.
  I asked that the bill and a letter of support be printed in the 
Record.
  The material follows:

                                S. 1530

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Family and 
     Medical Leave Clarification Act''.
       (b) References.--Except as otherwise expressly provided, 
     wherever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in 
     terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other 
     provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a 
     section or other provision of the Family and Medical Leave 
     Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.).
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents is as 
     follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; references; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definition of serious health condition.
Sec. 4. Intermittent leave.
Sec. 5. Request for leave.
Sec. 6. Substitution of paid leave.
Sec. 7. Regulations.
Sec. 8. Effective date.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (referred to 
     in this section as the ``Act'') is not working as Congress 
     intended when Congress passed the Act in 1993. Many 
     employers, including those employers that are nationally 
     recognized as having generous family-friendly benefit and 
     leave programs, are experiencing serious problems complying 
     with the Act.
       (2) The Department of Labor's overly broad regulations and 
     interpretations have caused many of these problems by greatly 
     expanding the Act's coverage to apply to many nonserious 
     health conditions.
       (3) Documented problems generated by the Act include 
     significant new administrative and personnel costs, loss of 
     productivity and scheduling difficulties, unnecessary 
     paperwork and recordkeeping, and other compliance problems.
       (4) The Act often conflicts with employers' paid sick leave 
     policies, prevents employers from managing absences through 
     their absence control plans, and results in most leave under 
     the Act becoming paid leave.

[[Page 19925]]

       (5) The Commission on Leave, established in title III of 
     the Act (29 U.S.C. 2631 et seq.), which reported few 
     difficulties with compliance with the Act, failed to identify 
     many of the problems with compliance because the study on 
     which the report was based was conducted too soon after the 
     date of enactment of the Act and the most significant 
     problems with compliance arose only when employers later 
     sought to comply with the Act's final regulations and 
     interpretations.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF SERIOUS HEALTH CONDITION.

       Section 101(11) (29 U.S.C. 2611(11)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses 
     (i) and (ii), respectively;
       (2) by aligning the margins of those clauses with the 
     margins of clause (i) of paragraph (4)(A);
       (3) by inserting before ``The'' the following:
       ``(A) In general.--''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Exclusions.--The term does not include a short-term 
     illness, injury, impairment, or condition for which treatment 
     and recovery are very brief.
       ``(C) Examples.--The term includes an illness, injury, 
     impairment, or physical or mental condition such as a heart 
     attack, a heart condition requiring extensive therapy or a 
     surgical procedure, a stroke, a severe respiratory condition, 
     a spinal injury, appendicitis, pneumonia, emphysema, severe 
     arthritis, a severe nervous disorder, an injury caused by a 
     serious accident on or off the job, an ongoing pregnancy, a 
     miscarriage, a complication or illness related to pregnancy, 
     such as severe morning sickness, a need for prenatal care, 
     childbirth, and recovery from childbirth, that involves care 
     or treatment described in subparagraph (A).''.

     SEC. 4. INTERMITTENT LEAVE.

       Section 102(b)(1) (29 U.S.C. 2612(b)(1)) is amended by 
     striking the period at the end of the second sentence and 
     inserting the following: ``, as certified under section 103 
     by the health care provider after each leave occurrence. An 
     employer may require an employee to take intermittent leave 
     in increments of up to \1/2\ of a workday. An employer may 
     require an employee who travels as part of the normal day-to-
     day work or duty assignment of the employee and who requests 
     intermittent leave or leave on a reduced schedule to take 
     leave for the duration of that work or assignment if the 
     employer cannot reasonably accommodate the employee's 
     request.''.

     SEC. 5. REQUEST FOR LEAVE.

       Section 102(e) (29 U.S.C. 2612(e)) is amended by inserting 
     after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) Request for leave.--If an employer does not exercise, 
     under subsection (d)(2), the right to require an employee to 
     substitute other employer-provided leave for leave under this 
     title, the employer may require the employee who wants leave 
     under this title to request the leave in a timely manner. If 
     an employer requires a timely request under this paragraph, 
     an employee who fails to make a timely request may be denied 
     leave under this title.
       ``(4) Timeliness of request for leave.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (3), a request for leave shall be considered to be 
     timely if--
       ``(A) in the case of foreseeable leave, the employee--
       ``(i) provides the applicable advance notice required by 
     paragraphs (1) and (2); and
       ``(ii) submits any written application required by the 
     employer for the leave not later than 5 working days after 
     providing the notice to the employer; and
       ``(B) in the case of unforeseeable leave, the employee--
       ``(i) notifies the employer orally of the need for the 
     leave--

       ``(I) not later than the date the leave commences; or
       ``(II) during such additional period as may be necessary, 
     if the employee is physically or mentally incapable of 
     providing the notification; and

       ``(ii) submits any written application required by the 
     employer for the leave--

       ``(I) not later than 5 working days after providing the 
     notice to the employer; or
       ``(II) during such additional period as may be necessary, 
     if the employee is physically or mentally incapable of 
     submitting the application.''.

     SEC. 6. SUBSTITUTION OF PAID LEAVE.

       Section 102(d)(2) (29 U.S.C. 2612(d)(2)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Paid absence.--Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and 
     (B), with respect to leave provided under subparagraph (D) of 
     subsection (a)(1), where an employer provides a paid absence 
     under the employer's collective bargaining agreement, a 
     welfare benefit plan under the Employee Retirement Income 
     Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), or under any 
     other sick leave, sick pay, or disability plan, program, or 
     policy of the employer, the employer may require the employee 
     to choose between the paid absence and unpaid leave provided 
     under this title.''.

     SEC. 7. REGULATIONS.

       (a) Existing Regulations.--
       (1) Review.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall review 
     all regulations issued before that date to implement the 
     Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2601 et 
     seq.), including the regulations published in sections 
     825.114 and 825.115 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations.
       (2) Termination.--The regulations, and opinion letters 
     promulgated under the regulations, shall cease to be 
     effective on the effective date of final regulations issued 
     under subsection (b)(2)(B), except as described in subsection 
     (c).
       (b) Revised Regulations.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Labor shall issue revised 
     regulations implementing the Family and Medical Leave Act of 
     1993 that reflect the amendments made by this Act.
       (2) New regulations.--The Secretary of Labor shall issue--
       (A) proposed regulations described in paragraph (1) not 
     later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act; 
     and
       (B) final regulations described in paragraph (1) not later 
     than 180 days after that date of enactment.
       (3) Effective date.--The final regulations take effect 90 
     days after the date on which the regulations are issued.
       (c) Transition.--The regulations described in subsection 
     (a) shall apply to actions taken by an employer prior to the 
     effective date of final regulations issued under subsection 
     (b)(2)(B), with respect to leave under the Family and Medical 
     Leave Act of 1993.

     SEC. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                  ____

                                                The FMLA Technical


                                        Corrections Coalition,

                                            7505 Inzer Street,

                                  Springfield, VA, August 5, 1999.
     Hon. Judd Gregg,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Children and Families,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC
       Dear Chairman Gregg: On behalf of the nearly 300 members of 
     the Family and Medical Leave Act Technical Corrections 
     Coalition, I am writing to commend you for introducing the 
     Family and Medical Leave Clarification Act and to offer our 
     support. This essential legislation would address the well-
     documented problems with the law's misapplication by 
     restoring the law to reflect the original intent of Congress.
       The Coalition is a diverse, broad-based, nonpartisan group 
     of nearly 300 leading companies and associations. Members of 
     the Coalition are fully committed to complying with both the 
     spirit and the letter of the FMLA and strongly believe that 
     employers should provide policies and programs to accommodate 
     the individual work-life needs of their employees. At the 
     same time, the Coalition believes that the FMLA should be 
     fixed to protect those employees that Congress aimed to 
     assist while streamlining administrative problems that have 
     arisen. Since the FMLA is not working properly, the Coalition 
     does not support expansions to the Act.
       Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the 
     Subcommittee during your July 14, 1999 hearing. The most 
     disturbing finding of the hearing was the fact that the 
     greatest cost of the FMLA's misapplication is the cost to 
     employees themselves. A strong public record has now been 
     thoroughly established. Numerous witnesses have now 
     documented the unintended consequences of the FMLA's 
     misapplication in three Congressional hearings;
       1. The May 9, 1996 hearing in the Senate Subcommittee on 
     Children and Families; 2. The June 10, 1997 hearing in the 
     House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee 
     on Education and the Workforce; and 3. Your July 14, 1999 
     hearing in your Senate Subcommittee on Children and Families.
       The hearings demonstrated that the FMLA's definition of 
     serious health condition is vague and overly broad due to the 
     Department of Labor's (DOL's) interpretations. Additionally, 
     the hearings documented that the intermittent leave 
     provisions as misapplied by the DOL are complicated and 
     difficult to administer, causing many serious workplace 
     problems.
       In addition, many companies expressed that Congress should 
     consider allowing employers to permit employees to take 
     either a paid leave package under an existing collective 
     bargaining agreement or the 12 weeks of FMLA protected leave, 
     whichever is greater.
       It is now time for the Senate to move forward to enact 
     ``The Family and Medical Leave Clarification Act'' on a 
     bipartisan basis. It is our strong hope that the Family and 
     Medical Leave Clarification Act will be fully embraced by all 
     the original authors of the FMLA and advance quickly in the 
     Senate with a bipartisan spirit.
       Technical corrections do not need to be polarizing, 
     combative or controversial, but they do need to be done as 
     soon as possible, so that the FMLA operates in the manner and 
     in the spirit that Congress intended.
       We thank you for your leadership on this critical 
     legislation and look forward to working with you to ensure 
     its success. The

[[Page 19926]]

     entire FMLA Technical Corrections Coalition looks forward to 
     working with you toward that end.
           Respectfully,
                                            Deanna R. Gelak, SPHR,
                                       Executive Director.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MOYNIHAN:
  S. 1531. A bill to amend the Act establishing Women's Rights National 
Historical Park to permit the Secretary of the Interior to acquire 
title in fee simple to the Hunt House located in Waterloo, New York; to 
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


         legislation authorizing the purchase of the hunt house

 Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill that 
would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to purchase the Hunt 
House in Seneca Falls, New York. This summer the owners of the Hunt 
House put it on the market for $139,000. Of four historic buildings in 
Seneca Falls that should be part of the Women's Rights National 
Historical Park, the Hunt House is the only one that is not. It was the 
site of the gathering of five women (the founding mothers, you might 
say) who decided to hold the nation's first women's rights convention. 
That convention took place in Seneca Falls in July, 1848. The Women's 
Rights Park is a monument to the idea they espoused that summer, that 
women should have equal right with men; one of the most influential 
ideas of the last 150 years.
  Adding the Hunt House to the Park would complete it. The problem is 
that the Department was not given the authorization to purchase the 
Hunt House in the bill I offered 20 years ago so that speculation would 
not drive up the price of the house when it eventually went on the 
market. That worked. But now the lack of an authorization should not 
keep us from being able to acquire the house at all. This bill simply 
removes the restriction against a fee simple purchase by the Park 
Service. I hope my colleagues will offer their support, and I ask that 
the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  The bill follows:

                                S. 1531

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

     SECTION 1. ACQUISITION OF HUNT HOUSE.

       Section 1601(d) of Public Law 97-607 (94 Stat. 3547; 16 
     U.S.C. 410ll(d)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by inserting after ``park,'' the 
     following: ``including the Hunt House designated under 
     subsection (c)(8),''; and
       (2) in the last sentence, by striking ``McClintock'' and 
     inserting ``Hunt''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Levin, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. 
        Moynihan):
  S. 1532. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to restrict 
the sale or other transfer of armor piercing ammunition and components 
of armor piercing ammunition disposed of by the Army; to the Committee 
on Armed Services.


    Military Armor Piercing Ammunition Resale Limitation Act of 1999

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, under the Conventional Demilitarization 
Program, the Department of Defense sells .50 caliber ammunition that 
has been on the shelf too long and could misfire or is otherwise 
unserviceable to a private company. That company refurbishes some of 
that ammunition and sells it to civilian buyers.
  Our colleagues in the House, Representatives Rod Blagojevich and 
Henry Waxman, asked the General Accounting Office to investigate the 
availability of armor-piercing .50 caliber ammunition in the United 
States. GAO investigators found that ``U.S.-made armor piercing fifty 
caliber ammunition is readily available in the United States and that 
this widespread availability is directly attributable to the little-
known Conventional Demilitarization Program within the Department of 
Defense.''
  I want to be sure that my colleagues know what .50 caliber rifles and 
ammunition can do. They can rip through bullet-proof glass, armor-
plated limousines, tanks, helicopters, or aircraft from more than a 
mile away with deadly accuracy. They can hit targets from four miles 
away. Their shells can pierce five or six walls with no problem. That 
is just what the armor-piercing variety can do. The armor-piercing 
incendiary .50 caliber ammunition can do everything I just mentioned, 
but then can also start a fire or explode on impact. So if the sniper 
missed the person inside the limousine or tank or airplane with an 
armor piercing shell, he could instead shoot an incendiary shell and 
cause the target to catch fire or blow up.
  Nobody goes deer hunting with a .50 caliber rifle. No one shoots a 
bear with .50 caliber rifle. There would be little left of the hapless 
animal, although I suppose fragments of it could come already barbecued 
if a .50 caliber incendiary shell were used.
  What is this weapon good for? It is an appropriate and necessary 
weapon for the United States Armed Forces and has some important law 
enforcement uses. Its usefulness was demonstrated time and again in the 
Gulf War to shoot Iraqi tanks, armored vehicles, and bunkers. It is 
terrific for blowing up land mines and other small unexploded ordnance. 
The tracer variety is important for military targeting at night.
  Otherwise, it is extremely useful for assassins, terrorists, drug 
cartels, and doomsday cults. Since 1992, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 
and Firearms has initiated 28 gun traces involving .50 caliber 
semiautomatic rifles. Many of these traces led to terrorists, outlaw 
motorcycle gangs, international and domestic drug traffickers, and 
violent criminals.
  The General Accounting Office conducted an undercover investigation 
that revealed that ammunition dealers use an ``ask no questions'' 
approach to the purchase of .50 caliber ammunition. Even after 
undercover GAO investigators made clear to ammunition dealers that they 
wanted to be sure the ammunition could pierce an armor-plated limousine 
or could shoot down a helicopter, the dealers were perfectly willing to 
sell it.
  In fact, there are fewer restrictions on the sale of .50 caliber 
weapons than on handguns. Yet a leading manufacturer of new .50 caliber 
ammunition, Arizona Ammunition, Inc., says it does not sell .50 caliber 
armor piercing, incendiary, and tracer ammunition to the general public 
``because they have no sporting application.'' That leaves the U.S. 
Department of Defense demilitarization contract as the source of U.S.-
made .50 caliber ammunition for the civilian market.
  Today I have introduced a bill that would require DoD contractors for 
the disposal of .50 caliber surplus military ammunition to agree not to 
sell the refurbished ammunition to civilians. The Defense Department 
must include in its contract a provision that refurbished .50 caliber 
may not be sold to non-military or law enforcement organizations or 
personnel. The Defense Department should no longer be the indirect 
source of ammunition that could be used for assassination, terrorism, 
or drug trafficking.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1532

       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 ``Military Armor Piercing 
     Ammunition Resale Limitation Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. RESALE OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION DISPOSED OF BY 
                   THE ARMY.

       (a) Restriction.--(1) Chapter 443 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 4688. Armor piercing ammunition and components: 
       condition on disposal

       ``(a) Limitation on Resale or Other Transfer.--Whenever the 
     Secretary of the Army carries out a disposal (by sale or 
     otherwise) of armor piercing ammunition, or a component of 
     armor piercing ammunition, the Secretary shall require as a 
     condition of the disposal that the recipient agree in writing 
     not to sell or otherwise transfer any of the ammunition 
     (reconditioned or otherwise), or any component of that 
     ammunition, to any purchaser in the United States other than 
     a law enforcement or other governmental agency.
       ``(b) Definition.--In this section, the term `armor 
     piercing ammunition' means a center-fire cartridge the 
     military designation of

[[Page 19927]]

     which includes the term `armor penetrator' or `armor 
     piercing', including a center-fire cartridge designated as 
     armor piercing incendiary (API) or armor-piercing incendiary-
     tracer (API-T).''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

``4688. Armor piercing ammunition and components: condition on 
              disposal.''.
       (b) Applicability.--Section 4688 of title 10, United States 
     Code (as added by subsection (a)), shall apply with respect 
     to any disposal of ammunition or components referred to in 
     that section after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. McCain):
  S. 1534. A bill to reauthorize the Coastal Zone Management Act, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


                  COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1999

  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Coastal Zone 
Management Act of 1999. I am pleased that Senator McCain, Chairman of 
the Commerce Committee, is a cosponsor of this legislation. This bill 
reauthorizes the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) through Fiscal Year 
2004. This legislation will improve the qualify of life for those 
Americans fortunate enough to live in coastal communities and the 
millions of others who visit these regions each year. First and 
foremost, the bill recognizes the many benefits of economic 
development, and balances those needs with the protection of our 
valuable public resources.
  The United States has more than 95,000 miles of coastline along the 
Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans, Gulf of Mexico, and the Great 
Lakes. Nearly 53 percent of all Americans live in these coastal 
regions, but that accounts for only 11 percent of the country's total 
land area. This small portion of our country supports approximately 200 
sea ports, contains most of our largest cities, and serves as critical 
habitat for a variety of plants and animals.
  To help meet the growing challenges facing these coastal areas, 
Congress enacted the CZMA in 1972. The CZMA provides incentives to 
states to develop comprehensive programs that balance the many 
competing uses of coastal resources and to meeting the needs for the 
future growth of coastal communities.
  As a voluntary program, the framework of the CZMA provides guidelines 
for state plans to address multiple environmental, societal, cultural, 
and economic objectives. This allows the states the flexibility 
necessary to prioritize management issues and utilize existing state 
regulatory programs and statutes wherever possible. Obviously, each 
state's priorities and needs are unique. That is why this bill provides 
maximum flexibility to states to address the diverse problems affecting 
our coastal areas.
  The coastal zones managed under the CZMA range from the arctic to 
tropical islands, from sandy to rocky shorelines, and from urban to 
rural areas. Because of these varying habitats and resource types, no 
two state plan and the same, nor should they be.
  Likewise, there are multiple uses of the coastal zone. Coastal 
managers are asked to strike a balance among residential, commercial, 
recreational, and industrial development; harbor development and 
maintenance; shoreline erosion and commercial and recreational fishing. 
Coastal programs address these competing needs for resources, steer 
activities to appropriate areas of the coast, and attempt to minimize 
the effects of these activities on coastal resources. As you may 
imagine, being able to balance economic development while protecting 
public resources requires careful strategies, substantial financial 
resources, and cooperation among stakeholders.
  So far, 32 of the 35 eligible coastal states and U.S. territories 
have federally approved coastal zone management plans under the CZMA. 
Two of the remaining eligible states are currently completing their 
plans. I am proud to say that my state of Maine has had a federally 
approved plan since 1978. The approved plans cover 99% of the eligible 
U.S. coastline.
  Another component of the CZMA is the National Estuarine Research 
Reserve System. These reserves not only provide habitat for a wide 
variety of fish, invertebrates, birds, and mammals, but they also serve 
as natural laboratories for research and education. There are currently 
22 of these reserves in 18 states.
  Mr. President, this bill authorizes $100 million to carry out the 
objectives of the CZMA for fiscal year 2000. The authorization level 
increases by $5 million each year to $120 million in FY 2004. Of the 
annual $5 million increase, $3.5 million would be targeted for the base 
state-grant programs; $1 million would be authorized for coastal zone 
enhancement and coastal community grant programs; and $500,000 would be 
authorized for the national Estuarine Research Reserve System. This 
bill will enable the states to build upon the successes of their 
management plans an confront emerging problems along our coasts. 
Further, this bill allows each state to maintain the flexibility it 
requires in order to address the specific needs of its coastal 
communities.
  Because flexibility at the state level is a critical element of this 
bill, titled the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1999 allows states to 
establish partnerships with local communities to encourage wise and 
sustainable development of their public resources. As the United 
States' population continues to increase in coastal communities, it is 
imperative that we provide those communities with the capability to 
plan for growth. This will enable coastal communities to address open 
space needs, environmental protection, and infrastrasture needs.
  Finally, let me say that the foundation of this legislation is the 
existing federal/state partnership that has made the CZMA so effective. 
The federal funds to implement CZMA management plans are matched by 
state matching monies. Some states have capitalized on the 
opportunities presented by the CZMA by leveraging even more money than 
the required match. In my state, the State of Maine, for example, the 
importance of investing in coastal areas has been clearly recognized 
and the CZMA federal funds have been matched at a rate of seven state 
dollars per federal dollar. Given examples like this, the potential for 
this reauthorization could produce several hundred million dollars for 
coastal zone management programs.
  I believe the legislation that I am introducing today will provide 
states with the necessary funding and framework to meet the challenges 
facing our coastal communities in the 21st Century.
  Mr. President, this is a solid, reasonable and realistic bill that 
enjoys bipartisan support on the Commerce Committee. I look forward to 
moving this bill at the earliest opportunity.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
a section-by-section explanation of the bill be printed in the Record.

                                S. 1534

       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 ``Coastal Zone Management Act 
     of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENT OF COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT.

       Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this 
     Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an 
     amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the 
     reference shall be considered to be made to a section or 
     other provision of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 
     (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.).

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       Section 302 (16 U.S.C. 1451) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (a) through (m) as 
     paragraphs (1) through (13);
       (2) by inserting ``ports,'' in paragraph (3) (as so 
     redesignated) after ``fossil fuels,'';
       (3) by inserting ``including coastal waters and wetlands,'' 
     in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated) after ``zone,'';
       (4) by striking ``therein,'' in paragraph (4) (as so 
     redesignated) and inserting ``dependent on that habitat,'';
       (5) by striking ``well-being'' in paragraph (5) (as so 
     redesignated) and inserting ``quality of life'';
       (6) by striking paragraph (11) (as so redesignated) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(11) Land and water uses in the coastal zone and coastal 
     watersheds may significantly affect the quality of coastal 
     waters

[[Page 19928]]

     and habitats, and efforts to control coastal water pollution 
     from activities in these areas must be improved;''; and
       (7) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(14) There is a need to enhance cooperation and 
     coordination among States and local communities, to encourage 
     local community-based solutions that address the impacts and 
     pressures on coastal resources and on public facilities and 
     public service caused by continued coastal demands, and to 
     increase State and local capacity to identify public 
     infrastructure and open space needs and develop and implement 
     plans which provide for sustainable growth, resource 
     protection and community revitalization.''.

     SEC. 4. POLICY.

       Section 303 (16 U.S.C. 1452) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``the States'' in paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``State and local governments'';
       (2) by striking ``waters,'' each place it appears in 
     paragraph (2)(C) and inserting ``waters and habitats,'';
       (3) by striking ``agencies and State and wildlife agencies; 
     and'' in paragraph (2)(J) and inserting ``and wildlife 
     management; and'';
       (4) by inserting ``other countries,'' after ``agencies,'' 
     in paragraph (5);
       (5) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (6) by striking ``zone.'' in paragraph (6) and inserting 
     ``zone;''; and
       (7) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(7) to create and use a National Estuarine Research 
     Reserve System as a Federal, State, and community partnership 
     to support and enhance coastal management and stewardship; 
     and
       ``(8) to encourage the development, application, and 
     transfer of innovative coastal and estuarine environmental 
     technologies and techniques for the long-term conservation of 
     coastal ecosystems.''.

     SEC. 5. CHANGES IN DEFINITIONS.

       Section 304 (16 U.S.C. 1453) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and the Trust Territories of the Pacific 
     Islands,'' in paragraph (4);
       (2) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following:
       ``(8) The term `estuarine reserve' means a coastal 
     protected area which may include any part or all of an 
     estuary and any island, transitional area, and upland in, 
     adjoining, or adjacent to the estuary, and which constitutes 
     to the extent feasible a natural unit, established to provide 
     long-term opportunities for conducting scientific studies and 
     educational and training programs that improve the 
     understanding, stewardship, and management of estuaries.''; 
     and
       (3) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(19) The term `coastal nonpoint pollution control plan' 
     means a plan submitted by a coastal state to the Secretary 
     under section 306(d)(16).''.

     SEC. 6. REAUTHORIZATION OF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 
                   GRANTS.

       Section 305(a) (16 U.S.C. 1454(a)) is amended by striking 
     ``1997, 1998, and 1999,'' and inserting ``2000, 2001, 2002, 
     2003, and 2004,''.

     SEC. 7. REAUTHORIZATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE GRANTS.

       (a) Purposes.--Section 306(a) (16 U.S.C. 1455(a)) is 
     amended by inserting ``including developing and implementing 
     coastal nonpoint pollution control program components,'' 
     after ``program,''.
       (b) Acquisition Criteria.--Section 306(d)(10)(B) (16 U.S.C. 
     1455(d)(10)(B)) is amended by striking ``less than fee 
     simple'' and inserting ``other''.

     SEC. 8. COASTAL RESOURCE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       Section 306A (16 U.S.C. 1455a) is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end of subsection (a) the following:
       ``(3) The term `qualified local entity' means--
       ``(A) any local government;
       ``(B) any areawide agency referred to in section 204(a)(1) 
     of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act 
     of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3334 (a)(1));
       ``(C) any regional agency;
       ``(D) any interstate agency; and
       ``(E) any reserve established under section 315.'';
       (2) by inserting ``or other important coastal habitats'' in 
     subsection (b)(1) after ``306(d)(9)'';
       (3) by inserting ``or historic'' in subsection (b)(2) after 
     ``urban'';
       (4) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following:
       ``(5) The coordination and implementation of approved 
     coastal nonpoint pollution control plans.
       ``(6) The preservation, restoration, enhancement or 
     creation of coastal habitats.'';
       (5) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon in subsection 
     (c)(2)(D);
       (6) by striking ``section.'' in subsection (c)(2)(E) and 
     inserting ``section ;'';
       (7) by adding at the end of subsection (c)(2) the 
     following:
       ``(F) work, resources, or technical support necessary to 
     preserve, restore, enhance, or create coastal habitats; and
       ``(G) the coordination and implementation of approved 
     coastal nonpoint pollution control plans.''; and
       (8) by striking subsections (d), (e), and (f) and inserting 
     after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Source of Federal Grants; State Matching 
     Contributions.--
       ``(1) In general.--If a coastal state chooses to fund a 
     project under this section, then--
       ``(A) it shall submit to the Secretary a combined 
     application for grants under this section and section 306;
       ``(B) it shall match the combined amount of such grants in 
     the ratio required by section 306(a) for grants under that 
     section; and
       ``(C) the Federal funding for the project shall be a 
     portion of that State's annual allocation under section 
     306(a).
       ``(2) Use of funds.--Grants provided under this section may 
     be used to pay a coastal state's share of costs required 
     under any other Federal program that is consistent with the 
     purposes of this section.
       ``(e) Allocation of Grants to Qualified Local Entity.--With 
     the approval of the Secretary, the eligible coastal State may 
     allocate to a qualified local entity a portion of any grant 
     made under this section for the purpose of carrying out this 
     section; except that such an allocation shall not relieve 
     that State of the responsibility for ensuring that any funds 
     so allocated are applied in furtherance of the State's 
     approved management program.
       ``(f) Assistance.--The Secretary shall assist eligible 
     coastal States in identifying and obtaining from other 
     Federal agencies technical and financial assistance in 
     achieving the objectives set forth in subsection (b).''.

     SEC. 9. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT FUND.

       (a) Treatment of Loan Repayments.--Section 308(a)(2) (16 
     U.S.C. 1456a(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) Loan repayments made under this subsection--
       ``(A) shall be retained by the Secretary and deposited into 
     the Coastal Zone Management Fund established under subsection 
     (b); and
       ``(B) subject to amounts provided in Appropriations Acts, 
     shall be available to the Secretary for purposes of this 
     title and transferred to the Operations, Research, and 
     Facilities account of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration to offset the costs of implementing this 
     title.''.
       (b) Use of Amounts in Fund.--Section 308(b) (16 U.S.C. 
     1456a(b)) is amended by striking paragraphs (2) and (3) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Subject to Appropriation Acts, amounts in the Fund 
     shall be available to the Secretary to carry out the 
     provisions of this Act.''.

     SEC. 10. COASTAL ZONE ENHANCEMENT GRANTS.

       Section 309 (16 U.S.C. 1456b) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a)(1) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) Protection, restoration, enhancement, or creation of 
     coastal habitats, including wetlands, coral reefs, marshes, 
     and barrier islands.'';
       (2) by inserting ``and removal'' after ``entry'' in 
     subsection (a)(4);
       (3) by striking ``on various individual uses or activities 
     on resources, such as coastal wetlands and fishery 
     resources.'' in subsection (a)(5) and inserting ``of various 
     individual uses or activities on coastal waters, habitats, 
     and resources, including sources of polluted runoff.'';
       (4) by adding at the end of subsection (a) the following:
       ``(10) Development and enhancement of coastal nonpoint 
     pollution control plan components, including the satisfaction 
     of conditions placed on such programs as part of the 
     Secretary's approval of the programs.
       ``(11) Significant emerging coastal issues as identified by 
     coastal states, in consultation with the Secretary and 
     qualified local entities.'';
       (5) by striking ``proposals, taking into account the 
     criteria established by the Secretary under subsection (d).'' 
     in subsection (c) and inserting ``proposals.'';
       (6) by striking subsection (d) and redesignating subsection 
     (e) as subsection (d); and
       (7) by striking subsection (f) and redesignating subsection 
     (g) as subsection (e).

     SEC. 11. COASTAL COMMUNITY PROGRAM.

       The Act is amended by inserting after section 309 the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 309A. COASTAL COMMUNITY PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Coastal Community Grants.--The Secretary may make 
     grants to any coastal state that is eligible under subsection 
     (b)--
       ``(1) to assist coastal communities in assessing and 
     managing growth, public infrastructure, and open space needs 
     in order to provide for sustainable growth, resource 
     protection and community revitalization;
       ``(2) to provide management-oriented research and technical 
     assistance in developing and implementing community-based 
     growth management and resource protection strategies in 
     qualified local entities;
       ``(3) to fund demonstration projects which have high 
     potential for improving coastal zone management at the local 
     level; and
       ``(4) to assist in the adoption of plans, strategies, 
     policies, or procedures to support local community-based 
     environmentally-protective solutions to the impacts and 
     pressures on coastal uses and resources caused by development 
     and sprawl that will--
       ``(A) revitalize previously developed areas;
       ``(B) undertake conservation activities and projects in 
     undeveloped and environmentally sensitive areas;

[[Page 19929]]

       ``(C) emphasize water-dependent uses; and
       ``(D) protect coastal waters and habitats.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible for a grant under this 
     section for a fiscal year, a coastal state shall--
       ``(1) have a management program approved under section 306; 
     and
       ``(2) in the judgment of the Secretary, be making 
     satisfactory progress in activities designed to result in 
     significant improvement in achieving the coastal management 
     objectives specified in section 303(2)(A) through (K).
       ``(c) Source of Federal Grants; State Matching 
     Contributions.--If a coastal state chooses to fund a project 
     under this section, then--
       ``(1) it shall submit to the Secretary a combined 
     application for grants under this section and section 309;
       ``(2) it shall match the amount of the grant under this 
     section on the basis of a total contribution of section 306, 
     306A, and this section so that, in aggregate, the match is 
     1:1; and
       ``(3) the Federal funding for the project shall be a 
     portion of that State's annual allocation under section 309.
       ``(d) Allocation of Grants to Qualified Local Entity.--
       ``(1) In general.--With the approval of the Secretary, the 
     eligible coastal State may allocate to a qualified local 
     entity amounts received by the State under this section.
       ``(2) Assurances.--A coastal state shall ensure that 
     amounts allocated by the State under paragraph (1) are used 
     by the qualified local entity in furtherance of the State's 
     approved management program, specifically furtherance of the 
     coastal management objectives specified in section 303(2).
       ``(e) Assistance.--The Secretary shall assist eligible 
     coastal States and qualified local entities in identifying 
     and obtaining from other Federal agencies technical and 
     financial assistance in achieving the objectives set forth in 
     subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 12. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

       Section 310(b) (16 U.S.C. 1456c(b)) is amended by adding at 
     the end thereof the following:
       ``(4) The Secretary may conduct a program to develop and 
     apply innovative coastal and estuarine environmental 
     technology and methodology through a cooperative program. The 
     Secretary may make extramural grants in carrying out the 
     purpose of this subsection.''.

     SEC. 13. PERFORMANCE REVIEW.

       Section 312(a) (16 U.S.C. 1458(a)) is amended by adding 
     ``coordinated with National Estuarine Research Reserves in 
     the State'' after ``303(2)(A) through (K)''.

     SEC. 14. WALTER B. JONES AWARDS.

       Section 314 (16 U.S.C. 1461) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``shall, using sums in the Coastal Zone 
     Management Fund established under section 308'' in subsection 
     (a) and inserting ``may, using sums available under this 
     Act'';
       (2) by striking ``field.'' in subsection (a) and inserting 
     the following: ``field of coastal zone management. These 
     awards, to be known as the `Walter B. Jones Awards', may 
     include--
       ``(1) cash awards in an amount not to exceed $5,000 each;
       ``(2) research grants; and
       ``(3) public ceremonies to acknowledge such awards.'';
       (3) by striking ``shall--'' in subsection (b) and inserting 
     ``may select annually if funds are available under subsection 
     (a)--''; and
       (4) by striking subsection (e).

     SEC. 15. NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE SYSTEM.

       (a) Section 315(a) (16 U.S.C. 1461(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``consists of--'' and inserting ``is a network of 
     areas protected by Federal, State, and community partnerships 
     which promotes informed management of the Nation's estuarine 
     and coastal areas through interconnected programs in resource 
     stewardship, education and training, and scientific 
     understanding consisting of--''.
       (b) Section 315(b)(2)(C) (16 U.S.C. 1461(b)(2)(C)) is 
     amended by striking ``public education and interpretation; 
     and''; and inserting ``education, interpretation, training, 
     and demonstration projects; and''.
       (c) Section 315(c) (16 U.S.C. 1461(c)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Research'' in the subsection caption and 
     inserting ``Research, Education, and Resource Stewardship'';
       (2) by striking ``conduct of research'' and inserting 
     ``conduct of research, education, and resource stewardship'';
       (3) by striking ``coordinated research'' in paragraph (1)) 
     and inserting ``coordinated research, education, and resource 
     stewardship'';
       (4) by striking ``research'' before ``principles'' in 
     paragraph (2);
       (5) by striking ``research programs'' in paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``research, education, and resource stewardship 
     programs'';
       (6) by striking ``research'' before ``methodologies'' in 
     paragraph (3);
       (7) by striking ``data,'' in paragraph (3) and inserting 
     ``information,'';
       (8) by striking ``research'' before ``results'' in 
     paragraph (3);
       (9) by striking ``research purposes;'' in paragraph (3) and 
     inserting ``research, education, and resource stewardship 
     purposes;'';
       (10) by striking ``research efforts'' in paragraph (4) and 
     inserting ``research, education, and resource stewardship 
     efforts'';
       (11) by striking ``research'' in paragraph (5) and 
     inserting ``research, education, and resource stewardship''; 
     and
       (12) by striking ``research'' in the last sentence.
       (d) Section 315(d) (16 U.S.C. 1461(d)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Estuarine Research.--'' in the subsection 
     caption and inserting ``Estuarine Research, Education, and 
     Resource Stewardship.--'';
       (2) by striking ``research purposes'' and inserting 
     ``research, education, and resource stewardship purposes'';
       (3) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) giving reasonable priority to research, education, 
     and stewardship activities that use the System in conducting 
     or supporting activities relating to estuaries; and'';
       (4) by striking ``research.'' in paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``research, education, and resource stewardship 
     activities.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(3) establishing partnerships with other Federal and 
     State estuarine management programs to coordinate and 
     collaborate on estuarine research.''.
       (e) Section 315(e) (16 U.S.C. 1461(e)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``reserve,'' in paragraph (1)(A)(i) and 
     inserting ``reserve; and'';
       (2) by striking ``and constructing appropriate reserve 
     facilities, or'' in paragraph (1)(A)(ii) and inserting 
     ``including resource stewardship activities and constructing 
     reserve facilities.'';
       (3) by striking paragraph (1)(A)(iii);
       (4) by striking paragraph (1)(B) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) to any coastal State or public or private person for 
     purposes of--
       ``(i) supporting research and monitoring associated with a 
     national estuarine reserve that are consistent with the 
     research guidelines developed under subsection (c); or
       ``(ii) conducting educational, interpretive, or training 
     activities for a national estuarine reserve that are 
     consistent with the education guidelines developed under 
     subsection (c).'';
       (5) by striking ``therein or $5,000,000, whichever amount 
     is less.'' in paragraph (3)(A) and inserting ``therein. Non-
     Federal costs associated with the purchase of any lands and 
     waters, or interests therein, which are incorporated into the 
     boundaries of a reserve up to 5 years after the costs are 
     incurred, may be used to match the Federal share.'';
       (6) by striking ``and (iii)'' in paragraph (3)(B);
       (7) by striking ``paragraph (1)(A)(iii)'' in paragraph 
     (3)(B) and inserting ``paragraph (1)(B)'';
       (8) by striking ``entire System.'' in paragraph (3)(B) and 
     inserting ``System as a whole.''; and
       (9) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(4) The Secretary may--
       ``(A) enter into cooperative agreements, financial 
     agreements, grants, contracts, or other agreements with any 
     nonprofit organization, authorizing the organization to 
     solicit donations to carry out the purposes and policies of 
     this section, other than general administration of reserves 
     or the System and which are consistent with the purposes and 
     policies of this section; and
       ``(B) accept donations of funds and services for use in 
     carrying out the purposes and policies of this section, other 
     than general administration of reserves or the System and 
     which are consistent with the purposes and policies of this 
     section.

     Donations accepted under this section shall be considered as 
     a gift or bequest to or for the use of the United States for 
     the purpose of carrying out this section.''.
       (f) Section 315(f)(1) (16 U.S.C. 1461(f)(1)) is amended by 
     inserting ``coordination with other State programs 
     established under sections 306 and 309A,'' after 
     ``including''.

     SEC. 16. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT REPORTS.

       Section 316 (16 U.S.C. 1462) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``to the President for transmittal'' in 
     subsection (a);
       (2) by striking ``zone and an evaluation of the 
     effectiveness of financial assistance under section 308 in 
     dealing with such consequences;'' and insert ``zone;'' in the 
     provision designated as (10) in subsection (a);
       (3) by adding ``education,'' after the ``studies,'' in the 
     provision designated as (12) in subsection (a);
       (4) by striking ``Secretary'' in the first sentence of 
     subsection (c)(1) and inserting ``Secretary, in consultation 
     with coastal States, and with the participation of affected 
     Federal agencies,'';
       (5) by striking the second sentence of subsection (c)(1) 
     and inserting the following: ``The Secretary, in conducting 
     such a review, shall coordinate with, and obtain the views 
     of, appropriate Federal agencies.'';
       (6) by striking ``shall promptly'' in subsection (c)(2) and 
     inserting ``shall, within 4 years after the date of enactment 
     of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1999,''; and
       (7) by adding at the end of subsection (c)(2) the 
     following: ``If sufficient funds and resources are not 
     available to conduct such a

[[Page 19930]]

     review, the Secretary shall so notify the Congress.''.

     SEC. 17. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 318 (16 U.S.C. 1464) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(1) for grants under sections 306 and 306A,--
       ``(A) $55,500,000 for fiscal year 2000;
       ``(B) $59,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
       ``(C) $62,500,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       ``(D) $66,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
       ``(E) $69,500,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(2) for grants under sections 309 and 309A,--
       ``(A) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;
       ``(B) $21,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
       ``(C) $22,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       ``(D) $23,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
       ``(E) $24,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(3) for grants under section 315,--
       ``(A) $7,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;
       ``(B) $7,500,000 for fiscal year 2001;
       ``(C) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       ``(D) $8,500,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
       ``(E) $9,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(4) for grants to fund construction projects at estuarine 
     reserves designated under section 315, $12,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004; and
       ``(5) for costs associated with administering this title, 
     $5,500,000 for fiscal year 2000 and such sums as are 
     necessary for fiscal years 2001-2004.'';
       (2) by striking ``306 or 309.'' in subsection (b) and 
     inserting ``306.'';
       (3) by striking ``during the fiscal year, or during the 
     second fiscal year after the fiscal year, for which'' in 
     subsection (c) and inserting ``within 3 years from when'';
       (4) by striking ``under the section for such reverted 
     amount was originally made available.'' in subsection (c) and 
     inserting ``to States under this Act.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(d) Purchase of Otherwise Unavailable Federal Products 
     and Services.--Federal funds allocated under this title may 
     be used by grantees to purchase Federal products and services 
     not otherwise available.
       ``(e) Restriction on Use of Amounts for Program, 
     Administrative, or Overhead Costs.--Except for funds 
     appropriated under subsection (a)(5), amounts appropriated 
     under this section shall be available only for grants to 
     States and shall not be available for other program, 
     administrative, or overhead costs of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration or the Department of Commerce.''.
                                  ____


     Section-by-Section of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1999

       Section 1. Section 1 provides the title of the Bill: 
     Coastal Zone Management Act of 1999.
       Section 2. Section 2 specifies that amendments and repeals 
     shall be applied to the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 
     (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.) (CZMA).
       Section 3. Section 3 amends the CZMA congressional findings 
     to update emerging issues and to reflect the need for Federal 
     and state support of local community-based comprehensive 
     planning and solutions to local problems.
       Section 4. Section 4 amends the congressional declarations 
     of policy to support the National Estuarine Research Reserve 
     System (NERRS) and to encourage the use of innovative 
     technologies in the coastal zone.
       Section 5. Section 5 amends the CZMA definitions to clarify 
     the terms ``estuarine reserve'' and ``coastal nonpoint 
     pollution control plan'' and to clarify that ``coastal 
     state'' no longer includes the trust territories of the 
     Pacific Island, i.e. the now independent nation of Palau.
       Section 6. Section 6 amends section 305(a) of the CZMA to 
     ensure that resources are available to the remaining states 
     without approved coastal management programs to complete such 
     program development.
       Section 7. Section 7 amends section 306 to reauthorize the 
     base administrative grant program and clarifies which 
     programs are eligible for grants under this section.
       Section 8. Section 8 amends section 306A, the coastal 
     resource improvement grants, by defining the term ``qualified 
     local entity.'' Section 8 broadens the objectives to which 
     that Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) may allocate funds and 
     provides states with the option of allocating funds for 
     restoration and preservation of coastal habitats as well as 
     the continued implementation of the states' coastal nonpoint 
     plans.
       Section 9. Section 9 amends section 308, the coastal zone 
     management fund, by moving CZMA program administration to 
     section 318, transfer load repayments to the Operations, 
     Research and Facilities account, and deletes the annual 
     reporting requirement.
       Section 10. Section 10 amends section 309, the coastal zone 
     enhancement grants, by adding two new objectives to which the 
     Secretary may allocate funds and provides states with the 
     option of allocating funds for restoration and preservation 
     of coastal habitats as well as the continued implementation 
     of the states' coastal nonpoint plans. Section 10 also amends 
     section 309(d) by removing outdated sections and amends 
     section 309(f) to remove the $10,000,000 cap on annual 
     section 309 allocations to conform with increasing 
     authorization levels.
       Section 11. The Coastal Community Program creates a new 
     grant option section 309A) for states that want to focus on 
     coastal community-based initiatives. This section 
     demonstrates the need for Federal and state support of 
     community-based planning, strategies, and solutions to local 
     sprawl and development issues in the coastal zone. This 
     section allows the Secretary to make grants to states through 
     the base program allocation formula and requires that the 
     states match the amount of the grant so that section 306, 
     306A and this section, in aggregate, equal a 1:1 match. It 
     will also revitalize previously developed areas, promote 
     conservation projects in environmentally sensitive areas, 
     emphasize water dependent uses, and protect coastal habitats.
       Section 12. Section 12 amends section 310, technical 
     assistance, to allow the Secretary to conduct a cooperative 
     program to apply innovative technologies to the coastal zone.
       Section 13. Section 13 amends section 312(a), performance 
     review, by adding coordination with the national estuarine 
     research reserves to the review of performance process.
       Section 14. Section 14 amends section 314 of the CZMA to 
     allow the Secretary the discretion to issue the Walter B. 
     Jones Awards if funds are available.
       Section 15. Section 15 amends section 315 of the CZMA to 
     clarify and strengthen the National Estuarine Research 
     Reserve System. A majority of the amendments are technical 
     changes to include training, education and stewardship 
     concepts. This section clarifies the NERRS description and 
     allows the Secretary to enter into contracts and agreements 
     with non-profit organizations to carry out projects that 
     support reserves and to accept donations of funds or services 
     for projects consistent with the purposes of section 315.
       Section 16. Section 16 amends section 316 of the CZMA to 
     clarify the requirements for the reports to Congress and to 
     provide to Congress a report on federal agency coordination 
     and cooperation in coastal management.
       Section 17. Section 17 amends section 318, authorization of 
     appropriations, to authorize CZMA funding, providing a 
     separate line items for 306 and 306A, 309 and 309A, 315, a 
     NERRS construction fund, and administrative costs.

 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the 
National Marine Sanctuaries Amendments Act of 1999. I want to thank 
Senator Snowe for sponsoring this legislation. This bill will help 
guide the use of the our marine environment into the next century. 
Again, I wish to thank Senator Snowe for her leadership in this area.
  The 12 existing national marine sanctuaries protect our marine 
resources while facilitating ``compatible'' public and private uses of 
the ocean. The National Marine Sanctuaries Program reflects a 
responsible balance between conservation and multiple uses, such as 
commercial fishing and recreational activities. In addition, the 
national sanctuaries provide for important research, outreach, and 
educational activities involving unique marine assets.
  To date, the sanctuary program has been unable to reach its full 
potential due to a lack of funding. This bill will make existing 
sanctuaries fully operational for the first time in the history of the 
program. The bill we are introducing today authorizes $30 million in FY 
2000 and incrementally increases the annual authorization by $2 million 
a year to $38 million in FY 2004. The bill will also allow for the 
completion of basic tasks which have been neglected in the past at 
sanctuaries, such as a review of each sanctuary management plan and 
habitat characterizations. The research and educational opportunities 
provided by this legislation are quite promising and will allow our 
children and future generations to learn to value our ocean resources.
  The bill also provides for the implementation of meaningful 
enforcement plans and allows sanctuaries to partner with states or 
other entities to enhance enforcement efforts. Furthermore, 
interference with an enforcement agent could result in a criminal 
penalty.
  Mr. President, this is a strong bill that enjoys bipartisan support 
on the Commerce Committee. With this legislation, Senator Snowe and I 
envision a reasonable balance between conservation and the compatible 
multiple uses of our ocean resources in marine sanctuaries. I look 
forward to moving this bill in the near future and request the support 
of my colleagues.
                                 ______
                                 

                             By Mr. GRAMS:

  S. 1535. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide for

[[Page 19931]]

coverage of outpatient prescription drugs under part B of the Medicare 
program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


          medicare ensuring prescription drugs for seniors act

 Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation I've drafted to provide a prescription drug benefit for 
Medicare beneficiaries.
  While I firmly believe we must deal directly with the structural 
problems facing the Medicare program, I also understand the very real 
need to provide prescription drug coverage now.
  Mr. President, Americans might be surprised to learn there are 
estimates that about half the people who have ever--ever--reached age 
65 are alive today. It's a revealing statistic--one we should be proud 
of because America has had much to do with the success in lengthening 
the life expectancy of nearly everyone in the world. Whether it's 
through government-funded research at the National Institutes of Health 
or private research funded through foundations, it has all contributed 
to this success.
  In 1900, the average American could expect to see their 47th 
birthday. Today, Americans can expect to celebrate 29 more birthdays--
living to the age of 76. Clearly, this increased life expectancy can be 
attributed to many things, but the advances made in pharmaceuticals is, 
perhaps, the most significant contributor.
  When the Medicare program was being discussed by Congress in the 
1960s, no one could foresee the enormous change our health care system 
would experience over the course of thirty years. Of course, we 
couldn't have expected them to know how different things would be 
today.
  In the 1960s, health care was predominately hospital or clinic 
oriented and as a result, Medicare focused on hospital stays. Indeed, 
even months before the final Medicare package was passed there was 
debate over whether physician visits should be included in the program. 
Now, we find ourselves with a program going broke, but in need of 
reform--a program largely successful for the past 30 years, but 
woefully inadequate in meeting the needs of today's seniors.
  Mr. President, one of the first witnesses before the Bipartisan 
Commission on the Future of Medicare, Robert Reischauer, described 
Medicare's problems as the four ``i's:'' insolvency, inadequacy, 
inefficiency and inequity. I couldn't agree more.
  As I alluded to earlier, perhaps the best example of the inadequacy 
of the current Medicare program is the lack of a prescription drug 
benefit. While I continue to believe the best way for us to include a 
prescription drug benefit in Medicare is through overall reform, I also 
believe it is important for us to explore different ways we can meet 
the challenge of adding the benefit without undermining the entire 
program.
  In putting together my plan for providing a prescription benefit, I 
tried to keep in mind the root of our dilemma. Many make the mistake of 
thinking access to needed pharmaceuticals is the problem. It's not--
affording the increasing number and cost of prescriptions is the real 
problem facing seniors today.
  Mr. President, my plan, the ``MEDS Act of 1999,'' would work like 
this:
  Single seniors with incomes of $927 per month or less, will be 
eligible to receive their prescription drugs with a 25 percent co-
payment and no deductible. Married seniors with incomes of $1,244 per 
month or less will be eligible for the same co-payment of 25 percent 
with no deductible.
  The income figures are the equivalent of 135 percent of the federal 
poverty level.
  Seniors above the income limits will be protected through a monthly 
deductible of $150. For amounts over those deductibles, Medicare will 
pay 75 percent of the prescription cost.
  Mr. President, rather than using a yearly deductible, which, in the 
first months, forces many seniors to use more of their monthly income 
on prescription drugs than they can often afford, my plan uses a 
monthly deductible allowing seniors to budget their drug costs every 
month.
  In addition, it ensures that if a senior, such a your parent or 
grandparent, is seriously ill in one month, Medicare will cover 75 
percent of their drug costs with no caps on the benefit. Meaning, they 
get the help they need when they need it.
  While I understand there will be concerns about how we determine when 
a beneficiary has reached their $150 deductible, particularly on a 
monthly basis, I contend that we have the knowledge and technology 
necessary to structure the program nearly any way we wish--we simply 
have to use it.
  Mr. President, America's seniors understand that if their drug costs 
are $50 a month, it doesn't make sense for them to buy a drug insurance 
policy for $100 a month. In this case, prescription drug coverage is 
not the issue. The issue is, can the senior trying to get by an $600 a 
month afford the $50 or $75 a month to pay for their medications? And, 
in the event of a major illness, can a senior bear the entire cost of 
treatment during that particular month?
  My plan would make sure that person gets relief when the costs become 
too much to handle. It is truly a safety net for seniors and especially 
for those who would not otherwise be able to reap the benefits of 
modern medicine.
  I believe this is a responsible, credible plan for America's seniors. 
I hope it will serve as a starting point for an honest, rational and 
responsible discussion about who needs help and how much.
  While I applaud the President for putting forward a plan, I believe 
it falls short in one important way--it doesn't help those who need it 
most.
  President Clinton's plan requires all seniors to pay $288 in monthly 
premiums and a co-payment of 50 percent up to $2,000. Under the 
President's plan, the most benefit any senior could get is $712 and, by 
capping the benefit at $2,000, it abandons seniors when they need help 
most.
  The debate over prescription drug coverage and overall Medicare 
reform may be political for some, but I know seniors in Minnesota who 
have difficulty paying for their prescriptions don't think much of 
political games played by politicians in Washington. They won't care 
who takes credit for this or that. They just want to know they won't go 
broke or hungry to pay for the medicines they need to stay alive. The 
plan I introduce today, the Medicare Ensuring Prescription Drugs for 
Seniors (MEDS) Act, will help ensure that they won't.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE:
  S. 1536. A bill to amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to extend 
authorizations of appropriations for programs under the Act, to 
modernize programs and services for older individuals, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                    The Older Americans Act of 1999

 Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I am very pleased to introduce The 
Older Americans Act of 1999--a bill that will reauthorize some of the 
most important, vital, and successful programs the Federal government 
provides to senior citizens.
  The Older Americans Act created and is responsible for:
  Programs that provide nutrition both at home and at senior community 
centers;
  Programs that protect the elderly from abuse, neglect, and unhealthy 
nursing homes;
  Programs that offer valuable jobs to seniors;
  Programs that furnish transportation; and
  Programs that render in-home services such as assistance with house-
hold tasks.
  As we approach the new millennium, these services and many others 
become more and more important--in fact, essential--to the continued 
well-being and prosperity of our nation's senior community. We are an 
aging nation. Today, 12.7% of the United States' population is over the 
age of 65. By the year 2030, that number will grow to 20%, and there is 
no indication that this trend will subside. Americans are living 
longer; many of them are healthier, wealthier, and better educated than 
Americans from two generations or even one generation ago.

[[Page 19932]]

  The Older Americans Act is a key component in ensuring not only 
valuable supportive services to lower-income older Americans, but also 
in establishing new and reliable services from which every older 
American can benefit.
  First, I want to focus on the services this reauthorization 
guarantees will continue--and for which, we hope, it will secure 
additional funding. The largest, and one of the most important, 
portions of the Older Americans Act has always been nutrition 
programming. There are two essential and equally important parts of the 
Act's nutrition programming: meals served in senior citizens centers, 
and meals delivered to individuals' homes.
  Providing meals in congregate settings allows people to eat with 
friends, take advantage of other social or informative opportunities, 
and be assured of a healthy diet.
  Home delivered meal programs give homebound individuals similar 
assurances of a healthy diet. Additionally, programs such as Meal-On-
Wheels also often give homebound seniors their only contact with the 
community. Those who deliver meals will also often help with minor 
chores and make sure that the senior they are visiting is in good 
general health.
  Under this reauthorization, congregate meal funding is protected by 
maintaining the law's language allowing a State to transfer no more 
than 30% of its congregate meal funding to home-delivered programs. 
Likewise, States will receive increased flexibility, through a waiver 
process, to request that any necessary amount be moved from congregate 
meal funds to meet the growing needs of homebound seniors.
  Another established service that would be improved by this bill is 
advocacy and protection. After a hearing that the Subcommittee on Aging 
dedicated to the issue of elder abuse, we made sure to include 
protection for elders not only from physical abuse and neglect, but 
also from financial abuse and exploitation. We also tied State and 
local advocacy and protection services directly to State and local law 
enforcement agencies as well as to the court system.
  During another of the Subcommittee on Aging's several hearings, we 
discussed the Senior Community Employment Service Program--the only 
Federally funded jobs program geared specifically for older Americans. 
The bill makes sure that the initial focus of the program, to provide 
seniors opportunities in community service jobs, stays intact. However, 
in light of the changing demographics among many senior communities and 
more and more seniors staying very active and capable for longer 
periods of time, the bill creates another focus: employment in the 
private sector and in a wider array of jobs.
  To do this, the bill creates strong links between the recently passed 
Workforce Investment Act and the Senior Community Employment Service 
Program. This will allow qualified seniors easy access to their State's 
workforce investment system and enhance their opportunity to choose 
which jobs they want. Likewise, these links will provide seniors in the 
State workforce investment systems easy access to the Senior Community 
Employment Service Program.
  Mr. President, as I mentioned, in addition to highlighting and 
improving the essential services that the Older Americans Act has 
provided so well for so long, this reauthorization also establishes new 
and equally reliable services from which every older American will be 
able to benefit.
  I thank Senator Grassley, and the Senate's Special Committee on 
Aging, for all his work, hearings, research, and help in developing two 
such services. The first is the National Family Caregiver Support Act, 
and the second is the Older Americans Act's new Pension Counseling 
program.
  The National Family Caregiver Support Act, through a network of Area 
Agencies on Aging and service providers, will provide family members--
nonprofessional or informal caregivers--valuable information and 
assistance about how to begin and continue caring for an aging 
relative. During another of our Subcommittee hearings, we heard moving 
testimony from a woman who decided that instead of placing her mother 
in a costly nursing home that would provide questionable care, she 
would bring her mother home and give her the care and attention she 
believed her mother needed and deserved.
  She did this at no small cost to herself. She had to discontinue her 
doctorate program. She had to find a job that had more accommodating 
hours and unfortunately with lower pay. She found that the State agency 
on aging and other bureaucratic ``assistance'' were more trouble than 
they were worth.
  She needed advice about lifting her mother, feeding her mother, 
medications, and many other challenges. Most of all, however, she said 
she just needed a break. The critical part of the National Family 
Caregiver Support Act would give her that break in the form of respite 
care; someone to take over for her for a weekend, a day, even a few 
hours so she could shop for herself, complete some overtime work, or 
just rest.
  The Caregiver Support Act also introduces an inter-generational 
element. During the Subcommittee's field hearing in Cleveland, we heard 
from grandmothers who, for any number of reasons, were now caring for 
their grandchildren. In some cases, their own children were addicted to 
drugs or in prison. Rather than relinquish their grandchildren to 
foster care, they took on the responsibilities of raising them. These 
women, and many other older Americans who now are raising children for 
the second time around, also need help. They need guidance, 
information, and respite care. Our bill would do that.
  Another new initiative is the Pension Counseling program. This 
program would provide desperately needed assistance to retirees who are 
in jeopardy of losing their pensions or are having difficulty receiving 
their pensions payments. As more and more individuals retire with more 
complicated pension, cost sharing, and IRA retirement plans, this will 
become an invaluable service.
  Mr. President, the Older Americans Act of 1999 will accomplish some 
long overdue changes. Reauthorizing this Act is a key step toward 
preparing this nation for the aging boom of the next few decades. 
However, I want to emphasize that as promising as this legislation is--
and as encouraged as I am by its introduction--it is still a work in 
progress. There are outstanding issues that need further attention and 
that require additional compromise. I look forward to working with all 
of my colleagues to resolve these issues throughout the August recess.
  I would like to thank Senator Milkulski, the Subcommittee's ranking 
member, for all her work, expertise, and assistance in developing this 
bill. I would also like to thank Senator Gregg for establishing the 
ground work as the Subcommittee's previous Chairman and for his 
expertise and input. Thank you also to Senators Hutchinson, Jeffords, 
McCain, Kennedy, and Wyden for all they and their staffs have 
contributed to the bill.
  I look forward to continuing our work on this bill, to quickly 
resolving any outstanding concerns, and moving on to final passage of a 
new and long awaited Older Americans Act.
                                 ______
                                 

      By Mr. CHAFEE (for himself and Mr. Smith of New Hampshire):

  S. 1537. A bill to reauthorize and amend the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.


          superfund amendments and reauthorization act of 1999

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Superfund 
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1999. This bill is based on S. 
1090, the Superfund Program Completion Act of 1999, a bill that I 
introduced, along with Senators Smith and Lott, earlier this year.
  Last year, the Committee reported a comprehensive Superfund bill to 
the Senate. However, gaining a consensus on a comprehensive bill was 
not possible last year, and the bill was not

[[Page 19933]]

called up. The most controversial issues were cleanup standards, paying 
``polluters,'' and natural resource damages.
  In S. 1090, we narrowed the scope of the bill greatly to get relief 
now for many parties--small businesses, local governments, municipal 
solid waste contributors--and we did it fairly, while strengthening the 
role of the states.
  Our goal was always to report a bill that enjoyed wide support. 
Unfortunately, Senator Smith and I were not able to move S. 1090 out of 
the committee. We spent several months negotiating with members on both 
sides of the aisle. The bill that Senator Smith and I introduce today 
serves as a record of our progress in trying to craft a broadly-
supported Superfund reform bill.
  The bill contains numerous changes from S. 1090. Some changes were 
made prior to the markup. Others are based on amendments filed for the 
markup, and others in response to negotiations over the last week.
  Our bills retains the key features of S. 1090. The Brownfields title 
will provide $100 million in grants for state, tribal and local 
governments to identify, assess and redevelop Brownfields sites. It 
protects prospective purchasers of contaminated sites, innocent owners 
of properties adjacent to the source of contamination, and innocent 
property owners who exercised due diligence upon purchase.
  The bill exempts recyclers, small businesses, contributors of very 
small amounts of hazardous waste, and contributors of small amounts of 
municipal solid waste. The bill limits the liability of larger 
generators or transporters of municipal solid waste. The bill limits 
the liability of larger generators or transporters of municipal solid 
waste, as well as owners or operators of co-disposal landfills where 
municipal solid waste is disposed. The bill limits the liability of so-
called de minimis parties--generally one percent contributors or less--
as well as municipalities and small businesses with a limited ability 
to pay.
  Importantly, this liability relief is provided fairly. EPA is 
directed to pay for the shares of exempted parties from a $200 million 
annual orphan share instead of merely shifting the liability onto the 
remaining nonexempt parties. Importantly, responsible parties still 
must proceed with the cleanup if $200 million is insufficient to cover 
all orphan shares in a given year.
  The bill also requires EPA to perform an impartial fair-share 
allocation at Superfund NPL sites and to give all parties an 
opportunity to settle for their allocated amount. Allocation is 
preceded by a period for EPA-directed alternative dispute resolution. 
Parties that do not participate or settle remain liable to Superfund's 
underlying liability provisions, which remain unchanged.
  The bill starts the process of bringing the National Priority List 
cleanup program to an orderly end. EPA notes that cleanup is complete 
or underway at more than 90 percent of the sites on the current NPL. 
EPA is cleaning up the sites at a rate of 85 per year, but it has 
listed only an average of about 26 sites per year. Last year, the 
General Accounting Office surveyed the states and EPA about the 
approximately 3,000 sites identified as possible National Priority List 
sites, but not yet listed. Only 232 of these sites were identified by 
either EPA, a state, or both, as likely to be listed on the NPL. The 
Superfund NPL cleanup program is closer to the end of its mission than 
to the beginning. The authorized funding levels in the bill, which 
decrease during the five-year authorization period, are consistent with 
the expected decrease in Superfund's workload.
  The ramp-down of the NPL cleanup program has important implications 
for state cleanup programs. The bill provides $100 million per year for 
state cleanup programs. Therefore, the bill requires EPA to plan how it 
will proceed at the 3,000 sites still awaiting a decision regarding NPL 
listing. Further, under our bill, new listings on the National Priority 
List must be approved by the Governor of the affected state.
  What is most important, the bill provides finality at sites cleaned 
up in state cleanup programs unless a state asks for help, fails to 
take action, or a true emergency is present. We know that the vast 
majority of sites not already listed on the NPL will be cleaned up by 
the states, not EPA. A strong finality provision will give greater 
confidence to prospective developers that state cleanup decisions will 
not be second-guessed by EPA. I would note that the bill includes new 
safeguards, not present in S.1090 as-introduced, to ensure a robust 
federal safety net if a state fails to meet its obligations.
  How does this bill differ from S. 1090? In preparation for the 
markup, members filed several amendments that Senator Smith and I plan 
to accept. Senator Bond filed several amendments to improve the 
brownfields provisions and protect law enforcement activities from 
Superfund liability. Senator Thomas filed an amendment to clarify the 
liability of common carriers and railroad spur track owners. Senator 
Inhofe filed an amendment to encourage the recycling of used oil, and 
another to improve the state cleanup program provisions. Senator Smith 
and I filed an amendment to study the costs of the Superfund program 
over the next ten years. All of these amendments are included in the 
new bill.
  Senator Smith and I have also included an amendment that we filed 
containing narrow provisions in two areas not originally addressed in 
S.1090: natural resource damages, and remedy. We offered the language 
in our negotiations in order to try to accommodate the concerns of 
Republicans members who felt that the scope of the bill was too narrow. 
We felt these provisions would solve most of the concerns that were 
raised without completely reopening the debates on NRD and remedy.
  The new remedy provisions would accomplish three things. First, it 
makes improvements to the system of identifying and applying the 
applicable relevant and appropriate requirements of other federal and 
state laws in Superfund cleanups. Second, the existing statutory 
preference for permanent remedies that use treatment is replaced by a 
preference limited to so-called ``hot spots.'' This comports with EPA's 
current practice, where 70% of all cleanup plans include containment 
instead of removal of the hazardous substance. Finally, new provisions 
establish procedures for the use of facility-specific risk assessments 
and the use of science in decision-making. This provision was closely 
modeled on the recent Safe Drinking Water Act Amendment.
  The new natural resource damages provision makes four significant 
changes to the NRD program.
  First, it provides a clear statement as to what costs a responsible 
party will be required to bear under a natural resource damage claim. A 
responsible party will be liable for only for the reasonable costs of 
restoring the resource--that is for reinstating the human uses and 
environmental functions of the resource.
  Second, it would eliminate recovery for any damages based on the 
nonuse values associated with an injured resource. Proponents of nonuse 
damages have argued that these damages are an important element of 
recovery in cases where a resource like the Grand Canyon is injured or 
destroyed. Our provision addresses this issue more directly. Instead, 
it recognizes that certain resources, such as endangered species, or 
wilderness areas, or certain national monuments are truly unique and 
therefore warrant special consideration. The language provides that 
where a unique resource has been damaged and is irreplaceable, the 
trustees may seek enhanced or expedited restoration.
  Third, it set parameters for determining whether the costs associated 
with a restoration measure are reasonable. Under this bill, the 
reasonableness of the costs will be determined based on four factors: 
technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness, the time period in which 
recovery will be achieved; and whether the response action or natural 
recovery will reinstate the uses of a resource in a reasonable period 
of time. This provision is not intended to require a cost-benefit 
analysis. However, it is intended to require

[[Page 19934]]

that trustees select cost-effective restoration measures.
  Fourth, it clarifies the prohibition against double recovery. It 
would protect responsible parties against claims under section 107(f) 
if damages have already been recovered for the same injury to the same 
resource under CERCLA, State or Tribal law.
  It is clear that we have moved a long way to try to reach an 
accommodation on both the right and the left. Perhaps this new bill can 
serve as the rallying-point if prospects for Superfund improve later in 
the Congress. In closing, I want to thank Senator Smith for his efforts 
on Superfund over the years.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1537

       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 ``Superfund 
     Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1999''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                  TITLE I--BROWNFIELDS REVITALIZATION

Sec. 101. Brownfields.
Sec. 102. Contiguous properties.
Sec. 103. Prospective purchasers and windfall liens.
Sec. 104. Safe harbor innocent landholders.

                   TITLE II--STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS

Sec. 201. State response programs.
Sec. 202. National Priorities List completion.
Sec. 203. Federal emergency removal authority.
Sec. 204. State cost share.

      TITLE III--FAIR SHARE LIABILITY ALLOCATIONS AND PROTECTIONS

Sec. 301. Liability exemptions and limitations.
Sec. 302. Expedited settlement for certain parties.
Sec. 303. Fair share settlements and statutory orphan shares.
Sec. 304. Treatment of religious, charitable, scientific, and 
              educational organizations as owners or operators.

        TITLE IV--REMEDY SELECTION AND NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES

Sec. 401. Selection and implementation of remedial actions.
Sec. 402. Use of risk assessment in remedy selection.
Sec. 403. Natural resource damages.
Sec. 404. Double recovery.

                            TITLE V--FUNDING

Sec. 501. Uses of Hazardous Substance Superfund.
                  TITLE I--BROWNFIELDS REVITALIZATION

     SEC. 101. BROWNFIELDS.

       Title I of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 127. BROWNFIELDS.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Brownfield facility.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `brownfield facility' means 
     real property, the expansion or redevelopment of which is 
     complicated by the presence or potential presence of a 
     hazardous substance.
       ``(B) Inclusion.--The term `brownfield facility' includes 
     real property that is contaminated with cocaine, heroin, 
     methamphetamine, or any other controlled substance (as 
     defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 
     U.S.C. 802)), a precursor chemical to a controlled substance, 
     or a residual chemical from the manufacture of a controlled 
     substance.
       ``(C) Exclusions.--The term `brownfield facility' does not 
     include--
       ``(i) any portion of real property that, as of the date of 
     submission of an application for assistance under this 
     section, is the subject of an ongoing removal under this 
     title;
       ``(ii) any portion of real property that has been listed on 
     the National Priorities List or is proposed for listing as of 
     the date of the submission of an application for assistance 
     under this section;
       ``(iii) any portion of real property with respect to which 
     cleanup work is proceeding in substantial compliance with the 
     requirements of an administrative order on consent, or 
     judicial consent decree that has been entered into, or a 
     permit issued by, the United States or a duly authorized 
     State under this Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6901 et seq.), section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321), the Toxic Substances Control 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), or the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.);
       ``(iv) a land disposal unit with respect to which--

       ``(I) a closure notification under subtitle C of the Solid 
     Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) has been 
     submitted; and
       ``(II) closure requirements have been specified in a 
     closure plan or permit;

       ``(v) a facility that is owned or operated by a department, 
     agency, or instrumentality of the United States; or
       ``(vi) a portion of a facility, for which portion, 
     assistance for response activity has been obtained under 
     subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6991 et 
     seq.) from the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund 
     established under section 9508 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986.
       ``(C) Facilities other than brownfield facilities.--That a 
     facility may not be a brownfield facility within the meaning 
     of subparagraph (A) has no effect on the eligibility of the 
     facility for assistance under any provision of Federal law 
     other than this section.
       ``(2) Eligible entity.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `eligible entity' means--
       ``(i) a general purpose unit of local government;
       ``(ii) a land clearance authority or other quasi-
     governmental entity that operates under the supervision and 
     control of or as an agent of a general purpose unit of local 
     government;
       ``(iii) a government entity created by a State legislature;
       ``(iv) a regional council or group of general purpose units 
     of local government;
       ``(v) a redevelopment agency that is chartered or otherwise 
     sanctioned by a State;
       ``(vi) a State; and
       ``(vii) an Indian Tribe.
       ``(B) Exclusion.--The term `eligible entity' does not 
     include any entity that is not in substantial compliance with 
     the requirements of an administrative order on consent, 
     judicial consent decree that has been entered into, or a 
     permit issued by, the United States or a duly authorized 
     State under this Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6901 et seq.), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 
     U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), or the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 
     U.S.C. 300f et seq.) with respect to any portion of real 
     property that is the subject of the administrative order on 
     consent, judicial consent decree, or permit.
       ``(3) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development.
       ``(b) Brownfield Site Characterization and Assessment Grant 
     Program.--
       ``(1) Establishment of program.--The Administrator shall 
     establish a program to provide grants for the site 
     characterization and assessment of brownfield facilities.
       ``(2) Assistance for site characterization and assessment 
     and response actions.--
       ``(A) In general.--On approval of an application made by an 
     eligible entity, the Administrator may make grants to the 
     eligible entity to be used for the site characterization and 
     assessment of 1 or more brownfield facilities.
       ``(B) Site characterization and assessment.--A site 
     characterization and assessment carried out with the use of a 
     grant under subparagraph (A)--
       ``(i) shall be performed in accordance with section 
     101(35)(B); and
       ``(ii) may include a process to identify and inventory 
     potential brownfield facilities.
       ``(c) Brownfield Remediation Grant Program.--
       ``(1) Establishment of program.--In consultation with the 
     Secretary, the Administrator shall establish a program to 
     provide grants to be used for response actions (excluding 
     site characterization and assessment) at 1 or more brownfield 
     facilities.
       ``(2) Assistance for response actions.--On approval of an 
     application made by an eligible entity, the Administrator, in 
     consultation with the Secretary, may make grants to the 
     eligible entity to be used for response actions (excluding 
     site characterization and assessment) at 1 or more brownfield 
     facilities.
       ``(d) General Provisions.--
       ``(1) Maximum grant amount.--
       ``(A) In general.--The total of all grants under 
     subsections (b) and (c) shall not exceed, with respect to any 
     individual brownfield facility covered by the grants, 
     $350,000.
       ``(B) Waiver.--The Administrator may waive the $350,000 
     limitation under subparagraph (A) based on the anticipated 
     level of contamination, size, or status of ownership of the 
     facility, so as to permit the facility to receive a grant of 
     not to exceed $600,000.
       ``(2) Prohibition.--
       ``(A) In general.--No part of a grant under this section 
     may be used for payment of penalties, fines, or 
     administrative costs.
       ``(B) Exclusions.--For the purposes of subparagraph (A), 
     the term `administrative cost' does not include the cost of--
       ``(i) investigation and identification of the extent of 
     contamination;
       ``(ii) design and performance of a response action; or
       ``(iii) monitoring of natural resources.
       ``(3) Audits.--The Inspector General of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall conduct such reviews or audits of 
     grants under this section as the Inspector General considers 
     necessary to carry out the objectives

[[Page 19935]]

     of this section. Audits shall be conducted in accordance with 
     the auditing procedures of the General Accounting Office, 
     including chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(4) Leveraging.--An eligible entity that receives a grant 
     under this section may use the funds for part of a project at 
     a brownfield facility for which funding is received from 
     other sources, but the grant shall be used only for the 
     purposes described in subsection (b) or (c).
       ``(5) Agreements.--Each grant made under this section shall 
     be subject to an agreement that--
       ``(A) requires the eligible entity to comply with all 
     applicable State laws (including regulations);
       ``(B) requires that the eligible entity shall use the grant 
     exclusively for purposes specified in subsection (b) or (c);
       ``(C) in the case of an application by an eligible entity 
     under subsection (c), requires payment by the eligible entity 
     of a matching share (which may be in the form of a 
     contribution of labor, material, or services) of at least 20 
     percent of the costs of the response action for which the 
     grant is made, is from non-Federal sources of funding.
       ``(D) contains such other terms and conditions as the 
     Administrator determines to be necessary to carry out this 
     section.
       ``(e) Grant Applications.--
       ``(1) Submission.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any eligible entity may submit an 
     application to the Administrator, through a regional office 
     of the Environmental Protection Agency and in such form as 
     the Administrator may require, for a grant under this section 
     for 1 or more brownfield facilities.
       ``(B) Coordination.--In developing application 
     requirements, the Administrator shall coordinate with the 
     Secretary and other Federal agencies and departments, such 
     that eligible entities under this section are made aware of 
     other available Federal resources.
       ``(C) Guidance.--The Administrator shall publish guidance 
     to assist eligible entities in obtaining grants under this 
     section.
       ``(2) Approval.--The Administrator, in consultation with 
     the Secretary, shall make an annual evaluation of each 
     application received during the prior fiscal year and make 
     grants under this section to eligible entities that submit 
     applications during the prior year and that the 
     Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary, determines 
     have the highest rankings under the ranking criteria 
     established under paragraph (3).
       ``(3) Ranking criteria.--The Administrator, in consultation 
     with the Secretary, shall establish a system for ranking 
     grant applications that includes the following criteria:
       ``(A) The extent to which a grant will stimulate the 
     availability of other funds for environmental remediation and 
     subsequent redevelopment of the area in which the brownfield 
     facilities are located.
       ``(B) The potential of the development plan for the area in 
     which the brownfield facilities are located to stimulate 
     economic development of the area on completion of the 
     cleanup, such as the following:
       ``(i) The relative increase in the estimated fair market 
     value of the area as a result of any necessary response 
     action.
       ``(ii) The demonstration by applicants of the intent and 
     ability to create new or expand existing business, 
     employment, recreation, or conservation opportunities on 
     completion of any necessary response action.
       ``(iii) If commercial redevelopment is planned, the 
     estimated additional full-time employment opportunities and 
     tax revenues expected to be generated by economic 
     redevelopment in the area in which a brownfield facility is 
     located.
       ``(iv) The estimated extent to which a grant would 
     facilitate the identification of or facilitate a reduction of 
     health and environmental risks.
       ``(v) The financial involvement of the State and local 
     government in any response action planned for a brownfield 
     facility and the extent to which the response action and the 
     proposed redevelopment is consistent with any applicable 
     State or local community economic development plan.
       ``(vi) The extent to which the site characterization and 
     assessment or response action and subsequent development of a 
     brownfield facility involves the active participation and 
     support of the local community.
       ``(vii) Such other factors as the Administrator considers 
     appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section.
       ``(C) The extent to which a grant will enable the creation 
     of or addition to parks, greenways, or other recreational 
     property.
       ``(D) The extent to which a grant will meet the needs of a 
     community that has an inability to draw on other sources of 
     funding for environmental remediation and subsequent 
     redevelopment of the area in which a brownfield facility is 
     located because of the small population or low income of the 
     community.''.

     SEC. 102. CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 107 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(o) Contiguous Properties.--
       ``(1) Not considered to be an owner or operator.--
       ``(A) In general.--A person that owns or operates real 
     property that is contiguous to or otherwise similarly 
     situated with respect to real property on which there has 
     been a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance 
     and that is or may be contaminated by the release shall not 
     be considered to be an owner or operator of a vessel or 
     facility under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a) solely 
     by reason of the contamination if--
       ``(i) the person did not cause, contribute, or consent to 
     the release or threatened release;
       ``(ii) the person is not affiliated through any familial or 
     corporate relationship with any person that is or was a party 
     potentially responsible for response costs at the facility;
       ``(iii) the person exercised appropriate care with respect 
     to each hazardous substance found at the facility by taking 
     reasonable steps to stop any continuing release, prevent any 
     threatened future release and prevent or limit human or 
     natural resource exposure to any previously released 
     hazardous substance;
       ``(iv) the person provides full cooperation, assistance, 
     and access to persons that are responsible for response 
     actions at the vessel or facility from which there has been a 
     release or threatened release, including the cooperation and 
     access necessary for the installation, integrity, operation, 
     and maintenance of any complete or partial response actions 
     at the vessel or facility;
       ``(v) the person does not impede the effectiveness or 
     integrity of any institutional control employed at the vessel 
     or facility; and
       ``(vi) the person complies with any request for information 
     or administrative subpoena issued by the President under this 
     Act.
       ``(B) Ground water.--With respect to hazardous substances 
     in ground water beneath a person's property solely as a 
     result of subsurface migration in an aquifer from a source or 
     sources outside the property, appropriate care shall not 
     require the person to conduct ground water investigations or 
     to install ground water remediation systems.
       ``(2) Assurances.--The Administrator may--
       ``(A) issue an assurance that no enforcement action under 
     this Act will be initiated against a person described in 
     paragraph (1); and
       ``(B) grant a person described in paragraph (1) protection 
     against a cost recovery or contribution action under section 
     113(f).''.
       (b) National Priorities List.--
       (1) In general.--Section 105 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(8)--
       (i) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) provision that in listing a facility on the National 
     Priorities List, the Administrator shall not include any 
     parcel of real property at which no release has actually 
     occurred, but to which a released hazardous substance, 
     pollutant, or contaminant has migrated in ground water that 
     has moved through subsurface strata from another parcel of 
     real estate at which the release actually occurred, unless--
       ``(i) the ground water is in use as a public drinking water 
     supply or was in such use at the time of the release; and
       ``(ii) the owner or operator of the facility is liable, or 
     is affiliated with any other person that is liable, for any 
     response costs at the facility, through any direct or 
     indirect familial relationship, or any contractual, 
     corporate, or financial relationship other than that created 
     by the instruments by which title to the facility is conveyed 
     or financed.''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Listing of Particular Parcels.--
       ``(1) Definition.--In subsection (a)(8)(C) and paragraph 
     (2) of this subsection, the term `parcel of real property' 
     means a parcel, lot, or tract of land that has a separate 
     legal description from that of any other parcel, lot, or 
     tract of land the legal description and ownership of which 
     has been recorded in accordance with the law of the State in 
     which it is located.
       ``(2) Statutory construction.--Nothing in subsection 
     (a)(8)(C) limits the Administrator's authority under section 
     104 to obtain access to and undertake response actions at any 
     parcel of real property to which a released hazardous 
     substance, pollutant, or contaminant has migrated in the 
     ground water.''.
       (2) Revision of national priorities list.--
       (A) In general.--The President shall annually revise the 
     National Priorities List to conform with the amendments made 
     by paragraph (1), based on individual delisting 
     recommendations made by each Regional Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency.
       (B) Delisted parcels.--In complying with this paragraph, 
     the President shall delist not more than 20 individual 
     parcels of real property from the National Priorities List in 
     any 1 calendar year.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 107(a) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) is amended by striking 
     ``of this section'' and inserting ``and the exemptions and 
     limitations stated in this section''.

[[Page 19936]]



     SEC. 103. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS AND WINDFALL LIENS.

       (a) Definition of Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser.--Section 
     101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(39) Bona fide prospective purchaser.--The term `bona 
     fide prospective purchaser' means a person that acquires 
     ownership of a facility after the date of enactment of this 
     paragraph, or a tenant of such a person, that establishes 
     each of the following by a preponderance of the evidence:
       ``(A) Disposal prior to acquisition.--All deposition of 
     hazardous substances at the facility occurred before the 
     person acquired the facility.
       ``(B) Inquiries.--
       ``(i) In general.--The person made all appropriate 
     inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the 
     facility and the facility's real property in accordance with 
     generally accepted good commercial and customary standards 
     and practices.
       ``(ii) Standards and practices.--The standards and 
     practices referred to in paragraph (35)(B)(ii) or those 
     issued or adopted by the Administrator under that paragraph 
     shall be considered to satisfy the requirements of this 
     subparagraph.
       ``(iii) Residential use.--In the case of property for 
     residential or other similar use purchased by a 
     nongovernmental or noncommercial entity, a facility 
     inspection and title search that reveal no basis for further 
     investigation shall be considered to satisfy the requirements 
     of this subparagraph.
       ``(C) Notices.--The person provided all legally required 
     notices with respect to the discovery or release of any 
     hazardous substances at the facility.
       ``(D) Care.--The person exercised appropriate care with 
     respect to each hazardous substance found at the facility by 
     taking reasonable steps to stop any continuing release, 
     prevent any threatened future release and prevent or limit 
     human or natural resource exposure to any previously released 
     hazardous substance.
       ``(E) Cooperation, assistance, and access.--The person 
     provides full cooperation, assistance, and access to persons 
     that are responsible for response actions at the vessel or 
     facility, including the cooperation and access necessary for 
     the installation, integrity, operation, and maintenance of 
     any complete or partial response actions at the vessel or 
     facility.
       ``(F) Institutional control.--The person does not impede 
     the effectiveness or integrity of any institutional control 
     employed at the vessel or facility.
       ``(G) Requests; subpoenas.--The person complies with any 
     request for information or administrative subpoena issued by 
     the President under this Act.
       ``(H) No affiliation.--The person is not affiliated through 
     any familial or corporate relationship with any person that 
     is or was a party potentially responsible for response costs 
     at the facility.''.
       (b) Amendment.--Section 107 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) (as amended by section 102) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(p) Prospective Purchaser and Windfall Lien.--
       ``(1) Limitation on liability.--Notwithstanding subsection 
     (a), a bona fide prospective purchaser whose potential 
     liability for a release or threatened release is based solely 
     on the purchaser's being considered to be an owner or 
     operator of a facility shall not be liable as long as the 
     bona fide prospective purchaser does not impede the 
     performance of a response action or natural resource 
     restoration.
       ``(2) Lien.--If there are unrecovered response costs at a 
     facility for which an owner of the facility is not liable by 
     reason of subsection (n)(1) and each of the conditions 
     described in paragraph (3) is met, the United States shall 
     have a lien on the facility, or may obtain from an 
     appropriate responsible party a lien on any other property or 
     other assurances of payment satisfactory to the 
     Administrator, for such unrecovered costs.
       ``(3) Conditions.--The conditions referred to in paragraph 
     (2) are the following:
       ``(A) Response action.--A response action for which there 
     are unrecovered costs is carried out at the facility.
       ``(B) Fair market value.--The response action increases the 
     fair market value of the facility above the fair market value 
     of the facility that existed 180 days before the response 
     action was initiated.
       ``(C) Sale.--A sale or other disposition of all or a 
     portion of the facility has occurred.
       ``(4) Amount.--A lien under paragraph (2)--
       ``(A) shall not exceed the increase in fair market value of 
     the property attributable to the response action at the time 
     of a subsequent sale or other disposition of the property;
       ``(B) shall arise at the time at which costs are first 
     incurred by the United States with respect to a response 
     action at the facility;
       ``(C) shall be subject to the requirements of subsection 
     (l)(3); and
       ``(D) shall continue until the earlier of satisfaction of 
     the lien or recovery of all response costs incurred at the 
     facility.''.

     SEC. 104. SAFE HARBOR INNOCENT LANDHOLDERS.

       (a) Amendment.--Section 101(35) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601(35)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in the matter that precedes clause (i), by striking 
     ``deeds or'' and inserting ``deeds, easements, leases, or''; 
     and
       (B) in the matter that follows clause (iii)--
       (i) by striking ``he'' and inserting ``the defendant''; and
       (ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, 
     has provided full cooperation, assistance, and facility 
     access to the persons that are responsible for response 
     actions at the facility, including the cooperation and access 
     necessary for the installation, integrity, operation, and 
     maintenance of any complete or partial response action at the 
     facility, and has taken no action that impeded the 
     effectiveness or integrity of any institutional control 
     employed under section 121 at the facility.''; and
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Reason to know.--
       ``(i) All appropriate inquiries.--To establish that the 
     defendant had no reason to know of the matter described in 
     subparagraph (A)(i), the defendant must show that--

       ``(I) at or prior to the date on which the defendant 
     acquired the facility, the defendant undertook all 
     appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of 
     the facility in accordance with generally accepted good 
     commercial and customary standards and practices; and
       ``(II) the defendant took reasonable steps to stop any 
     continuing release, prevent any threatened future release, 
     and prevent or limit human or natural resource exposure to 
     any previously released hazardous substance.

       ``(ii) Standards and practices.--The Administrator shall by 
     regulation establish as standards and practices for the 
     purpose of clause (i)--

       ``(I) the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 
     Standard E1527-94, entitled `Standard Practice for 
     Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site 
     Assessment Process'; or
       ``(II) alternative standards and practices under clause 
     (iii).

       ``(iii) Alternative standards and practices.--

       ``(I) In general.--The Administrator may by regulation 
     issue alternative standards and practices or designate 
     standards developed by other organizations than the American 
     Society for Testing and Materials after conducting a study of 
     commercial and industrial practices concerning the transfer 
     of real property in the United States.
       ``(II) Considerations.--In issuing or designating 
     alternative standards and practices under subclause (I), the 
     Administrator shall consider including each of the following:

       ``(aa) The results of an inquiry by an environmental 
     professional.
       ``(bb) Interviews with past and present owners, operators, 
     and occupants of the facility and the facility's real 
     property for the purpose of gathering information regarding 
     the potential for contamination at the facility and the 
     facility's real property.
       ``(cc) Reviews of historical sources, such as chain of 
     title documents, aerial photographs, building department 
     records, and land use records to determine previous uses and 
     occupancies of the real property since the property was first 
     developed.
       ``(dd) Searches for recorded environmental cleanup liens, 
     filed under Federal, State, or local law, against the 
     facility or the facility's real property.
       ``(ee) Reviews of Federal, State, and local government 
     records (such as waste disposal records), underground storage 
     tank records, and hazardous waste handling, generation, 
     treatment, disposal, and spill records, concerning 
     contamination at or near the facility or the facility's real 
     property.
       ``(ff) Visual inspections of the facility and facility's 
     real property and of adjoining properties.
       ``(gg) Specialized knowledge or experience on the part of 
     the defendant.
       ``(hh) The relationship of the purchase price to the value 
     of the property if the property was uncontaminated.
       ``(ii) Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable 
     information about the property.
       ``(jj) The degree of obviousness of the presence or likely 
     presence of contamination at the property, and the ability to 
     detect such contamination by appropriate investigation.
       ``(iv) Site inspection and title search.--In the case of 
     property for residential use or other similar use purchased 
     by a nongovernmental or noncommercial entity, a facility 
     inspection and title search that reveal no basis for further 
     investigation shall be considered to satisfy the requirements 
     of this subparagraph.''.
       (b) Standards and Practices.--
       (1) Establishment by regulation.--The Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency shall issue the regulation 
     required by section 101(35)(B)(ii) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (as added by subsection (a)) not later than 1 year after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Interim standards and practices.--Until the 
     Administrator issues the regulation described in paragraph 
     (1), in making a

[[Page 19937]]

     determination under section 101(35)(B)(i) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (as added by subsection (a)), there 
     shall be taken into account--
       (A) any specialized knowledge or experience on the part of 
     the defendant;
       (B) the relationship of the purchase price to the value of 
     the property if the property was uncontaminated;
       (C) commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information 
     about the property;
       (D) the degree of obviousness of the presence or likely 
     presence of contamination at the property; and
       (E) the ability to detect the contamination by appropriate 
     investigation.
                   TITLE II--STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS

     SEC. 201. STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 101 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601) (as amended by section 103(a)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(40) Facility subject to state cleanup.--The term 
     `facility subject to State cleanup' means a facility that--
       ``(A) is not listed or proposed for listing on the National 
     Priorities List; or
       ``(B) has been proposed for listing on the National 
     Priorities List, but for which the Administrator has notified 
     the State in writing that the Administrator has deferred 
     final listing of the facility pending completion of a 
     remedial action under State authority at the facility.
       ``(41) Qualifying state response program.--The term 
     `qualifying State response program' means a State program 
     that includes the elements described in section 128(b).''.
       (b) Qualifying State Response Programs.--Title I of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) (as amended by 
     section 101(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 128. QUALIFYING STATE RESPONSE PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Assistance to States.--The Administrator shall 
     provide grants to States to establish and expand qualifying 
     State response programs that include the elements listed in 
     subsection (b).
       ``(b) Elements.--The elements of a qualifying State 
     response program are the following:
       ``(1) Oversight and enforcement authorities or other 
     mechanisms that are adequate to ensure that--
       ``(A) response actions will protect human health and the 
     environment and be conducted in accordance with applicable 
     Federal and State law; and
       ``(B) in the case of a voluntary response action, if the 
     person conducting the voluntary response action fails to 
     complete the necessary response activities, including 
     operation and maintenance or long-term monitoring activities, 
     the necessary response activities are completed.
       ``(2) Adequate opportunities for public participation, 
     including prior notice and opportunity for comment in 
     appropriate circumstances, in selecting response actions.
       ``(3) Mechanisms for approval of a response action plan, or 
     a requirement for certification or similar documentation from 
     the State to the person conducting a response action 
     indicating that the response is complete.
       ``(c) Enforcement in Cases of a Release Subject to a State 
     Plan.--
       ``(1) Enforcement.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     in the case of a release or threatened release of a hazardous 
     substance at a facility subject to State cleanup, neither the 
     President nor any other person may use any authority under 
     this Act to take an enforcement action against any person 
     regarding any matter that is within the scope of a response 
     action that is being conducted or has been completed under 
     State law.
       ``(B) Exceptions.--The President may bring an enforcement 
     action under this Act with respect to a facility described in 
     subparagraph (A) if--
       ``(i) the enforcement action is authorized under section 
     104;
       ``(ii) the State requests that the President provide 
     assistance in the performance of a response action and that 
     the enforcement bar in subparagraph (A) be lifted;
       ``(iii) at a facility at which response activities are 
     ongoing the Administrator--

       ``(I) makes a written determination that the State is 
     unwilling or unable to take appropriate action, after the 
     Administrator has provided the Governor notice and an 
     opportunity to cure; and
       ``(II) the Administrator determines that the release or 
     threat of release constitutes a public health or 
     environmental emergency under section 104(a)(4);

       ``(iv) the Administrator determines that contamination has 
     migrated across a State line, resulting in the need for 
     further response action to protect human health or the 
     environment; or
       ``(v) in the case of a facility at which all response 
     actions have been completed, the Administrator--

       ``(I) makes a written determination that the State is 
     unwilling or unable to take appropriate action, after the 
     Administrator has provided the Governor notice and an 
     opportunity to cure; and
       ``(II) makes a written determination that the facility 
     presents a substantial risk that requires further remediation 
     to protect human health or the environment, as evidenced by--

       ``(aa) newly discovered information regarding contamination 
     at the facility;
       ``(bb) the discovery that fraud was committed in 
     demonstrating attainment of standards at the facility; or
       ``(cc) a failure of the remedy or a change in land use 
     giving rise to a clear threat of exposure.
       ``(C) EPA notification.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of a facility at which there 
     is a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance, 
     pollutant, or contaminant and for which the Administrator 
     intends to undertake an administrative or enforcement action, 
     the Administrator, prior to taking the administrative or 
     enforcement action, shall notify the State of the action the 
     Administrator intends to take and wait for an acknowledgment 
     from the State under clause (ii).
       ``(ii) State response.--Not later than 48 hours after 
     receiving a notice from the Administrator under clause (i), 
     the State shall notify the Administrator if the facility is 
     currently or has been subject to a cleanup conducted under 
     State law.
       ``(iii) Public health or environmental emergency.--If the 
     Administrator finds that a release or threatened release 
     constitutes a public health or environmental emergency under 
     section 104(a)(4), the Administrator may take appropriate 
     action immediately after giving notification under clause (i) 
     without waiting for State acknowledgment.
       ``(2) Cost or damage recovery actions.--Paragraph (1) shall 
     not apply to an action brought by a State, Indian Tribe, or 
     general purpose unit of local government for the recovery of 
     costs or damages under this Act.
       ``(3) Savings provision.--
       ``(A) Existing agreements.--A memorandum of agreement, 
     memorandum of understanding, or similar agreement between the 
     President and a State or Indian tribe defining Federal and 
     State or tribal response action responsibilities that was in 
     effect as of the date of enactment of this section with 
     respect to a facility to which paragraph (1)(C) does not 
     apply shall remain effective until the agreement expires in 
     accordance with the terms of the agreement.
       ``(B) New agreements.--Nothing in this subsection precludes 
     the President from entering into an agreement with a State or 
     Indian tribe regarding responsibility at a facility to which 
     paragraph (1)(C) does not apply.
       ``(4) State reimbursement and certification.--
       ``(A) In general.--On making a finding under this section 
     that a State is unwilling or unable to take appropriate 
     action to address a public health or environmental emergency, 
     the President may require that the State reimburse the 
     Hazardous Substance Superfund for response costs incurred by 
     the United States.
       ``(B) Certification.--On making a finding under this 
     section that a State is unwilling or unable to take 
     appropriate action to address a public health or 
     environmental emergency at 3 separate facilities within any 
     1-year period, the President may notify the Governor of the 
     State that this section shall not apply in the State until 
     the President certifies that the State's cleanup program is 
     adequate to ensure that response actions will protect human 
     health and the environment.''.

     SEC. 202. NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST COMPLETION.

       (a) In General.--Section 105 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605) is amended by striking subsection (b) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(b) National Priorities List Completion.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this paragraph, the President shall complete the 
     evaluation of all facilities classified as awaiting a 
     National Priorities List decision to determine the risk or 
     danger to public health or welfare or the environment posed 
     by each facility as compared with the other facilities.
       ``(2) Requirement of request by the governor of a state.--
     No facility shall be added to the National Priorities List 
     without the President having first received the concurrence 
     of the Governor of the State in which the facility is 
     located.''.
       (b) Independent CERCLA Cost Analysis.--
       (1) In general.--From amounts appropriated under section 
     111(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9611(a)), 
     the Administrator shall fund a cooperative agreement for an 
     independent analysis of the projected 10-year costs for the 
     implementation of the program under that Act.
       (2) Completion.--The independent analysis under paragraph 
     (1) shall be completed not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 203. FEDERAL EMERGENCY REMOVAL AUTHORITY.

       Section 104(c)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and

[[Page 19938]]

     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(c)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``consistent with the 
     remedial action to be taken'' and inserting ``not 
     inconsistent with any remedial action that has been selected 
     or is anticipated at the time of any removal action at a 
     facility,'';
       (2) by striking ``$2,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$5,000,000''; and
       (3) by striking ``12 months'' and inserting ``3 years''.

     SEC. 204. STATE COST SHARE.

       Section 104(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(c)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(c)(1) Unless'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(c) Miscellaneous Limitations and Requirements.--
       ``(1) Continuance of obligations from fund.--Unless'';
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``taken obligations'' and 
     inserting ``taken, obligations'';
       (3) by striking ``(2) The President'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Consultation.--The President''; and
       (4) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) State cost share.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall not provide any 
     funding for remedial action under this section unless the 
     State in which the release occurs first enters into a 
     contract or cooperative agreement with the Administrator that 
     provides assurances that the State will pay, in cash or 
     through in- kind contributions, 10 percent of the costs of--
       ``(i) the remedial action; and
       ``(ii) operation and maintenance costs.
       ``(B) State-operated facilities.--Notwithstanding 
     subparagraph (A), the Administrator may require a State 
     contribution, in cash or in-kind, of 50 percent of the costs 
     of any sums expended in response to a release at a facility 
     that was operated by the State or a political subdivision of 
     the State, either directly or through a contractual 
     relationship or otherwise, at the time of any disposal of 
     hazardous substances therein.
       ``(C) Activities with respect to which state cost share is 
     required.--No State cost share shall be required except for 
     remedial actions under this section.
       ``(D) Indian tribes.--The requirements of this paragraph 
     shall not apply in the case of remedial action to be taken on 
     land or water--
       ``(i) held by an Indian Tribe;
       ``(ii) held by the United States in trust for an Indian 
     Tribe;
       ``(iii) held by a member of an Indian Tribe (if the land or 
     water is subject to a trust restriction on alienation); or
       ``(iv) within the borders of an Indian reservation.''.
      TITLE III--FAIR SHARE LIABILITY ALLOCATIONS AND PROTECTIONS

     SEC. 301. LIABILITY EXEMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 101 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Liability, and Compensation Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601) (as amended by section 201(a)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(42) Codisposal landfill.--The term `codisposal landfill' 
     means a landfill that--
       ``(A) was listed on the National Priorities List as of the 
     date of enactment of this paragraph;
       ``(B) received for disposal municipal solid waste or sewage 
     sludge; and
       ``(C) may also have received, before the effective date of 
     requirements under subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.), any hazardous waste, if the 
     landfill contains predominantly municipal solid waste or 
     sewage sludge that was transported to the landfill from 
     outside the facility.
       ``(43) Municipal solid waste.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `municipal solid waste' means 
     waste material generated by--
       ``(i) a household (such as a single- or multi-family 
     residence) or a public lodging (such as a hotel or motel); or
       ``(ii) a commercial, institutional, or industrial source, 
     to the extent that--

       ``(I) the waste material is substantially similar to waste 
     normally generated by a household or public lodging (without 
     regard to differences in volume); or
       ``(II) the waste material is collected and disposed of with 
     other municipal solid waste or municipal sewage sludge as 
     part of normal municipal solid waste collection services, 
     and, with respect to each source from which the waste 
     material is collected, qualifies for a de micromis exemption 
     under section 107(r).

       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `municipal solid waste' 
     includes food and yard waste, paper, clothing, appliances, 
     consumer product packaging, disposable diapers, office 
     supplies, cosmetics, glass and metal food containers, 
     elementary or secondary school science laboratory waste, and 
     household hazardous waste.
       ``(C) Exclusions.--The term `municipal solid waste' does 
     not include combustion ash generated by resource recovery 
     facilities or municipal incinerators or waste from 
     manufacturing or processing (including pollution control) 
     operations.
       ``(44) Municipality.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `municipality' means a 
     political subdivision of a State (including a city, county, 
     village, town, township, borough, parish, school district, 
     sanitation district, water district, or other public entity 
     performing local governmental functions).
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `municipality' includes a 
     natural person acting in the capacity of an official, 
     employee, or agent of any entity described in subparagraph 
     (A) in the performance of a governmental function.
       ``(45) Sewage sludge.--The term `sewage sludge' means 
     solid, semisolid, or liquid residue removed during the 
     treatment of municipal waste water, domestic sewage, or other 
     waste water at or by publicly owned treatment works.''.
       (b) Exemptions and Limitations.--
       (1) In general.--Section 107 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607) (as amended by section 103(b)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(q) Liability Exemption for Municipal Solid Waste and 
     Sewage Sludge.--No person shall be liable to the United 
     States or to any other person (including liability for 
     contribution) under this section for any response costs at a 
     facility listed on the National Priorities List to the extent 
     that--
       ``(1) the person is liable solely under paragraph (3) or 
     (4) of subsection (a);
       ``(2) the person is liable based on an arrangement for 
     disposal or treatment of, an arrangement with a transporter 
     for transport for disposal or treatment of, or an acceptance 
     for transport for disposal or treatment at a facility of, 
     municipal solid waste;
       ``(3) the person provides full cooperation, assistance, and 
     access to persons that are responsible for response actions 
     at the vessel or facility, including the cooperation and 
     access necessary for the installation, integrity, operation, 
     and maintenance of any complete or partial response actions 
     at the vessel or facility;
       ``(4) the person does not impede the effectiveness or 
     integrity of any institutional control employed at the vessel 
     or facility;
       ``(5) the person complies with any request for information 
     or administrative subpoena issued by the President under this 
     Act; and
       ``(6) the person is--
       ``(A) an owner, operator, or lessee of residential property 
     from which all of the person's municipal solid waste was 
     generated;
       ``(B) a business entity that, during the tax year preceding 
     the date of transmittal of written notification that the 
     business is potentially liable, employs not more than 100 
     individuals; or
       ``(C) a nonprofit organization described in section 
     501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that employs 
     not more than 100 individuals, from which all of the person's 
     municipal solid waste was generated.
       ``(r) De Micromis Contributor Exemption.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of a vessel or facility 
     listed on the National Priorities List, no person described 
     in paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (a) shall be liable to 
     the United States or to any other person (including liability 
     for contribution) for any response costs under this section 
     if the activity specifically attributable to the person 
     resulted in the disposal or treatment of not more than 200 
     pounds or 110 gallons of material containing a hazardous 
     substance at the vessel or facility before the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, or such greater amount as the 
     Administrator may determine by regulation.
       ``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply in a case 
     in which the Administrator determines that material described 
     in paragraph (1) has contributed or may contribute 
     significantly, individually, to the amount of response costs 
     at the facility.
       ``(s) Small Business Exemption.--
       ``(1) In general.--No person shall be liable to the United 
     States or to any person (including liability for 
     contribution) under this section for any response costs at a 
     facility listed on the National Priorities List if--
       ``(A) the person is liable solely under paragraph (3) or 
     (4) or subsection (a);
       ``(B) the person is a business that--
       ``(i) during the taxable year preceding the date of 
     transmittal of notification that the business is a 
     potentially responsible party, had full- and part-time 
     employees whose combined time was equivalent to 75 or fewer 
     full-time employees; or
       ``(ii) for that taxable year reported $3,000,000 or less in 
     gross revenue;
       ``(C) the activity specifically attributable to the person 
     resulted in the disposal or treatment of material containing 
     a hazardous substance at the vessel or facility before the 
     date of enactment of this subsection;
       ``(D) the person is not affiliated through any familial or 
     corporate relationship with any person that is or was a party 
     potentially responsible for response costs at the facility;
       ``(E) the person provides full cooperation, assistance, and 
     access to persons that are responsible for response actions 
     at the vessel or facility, including the cooperation and 
     access necessary for the installation, integrity, operation, 
     and maintenance of any complete

[[Page 19939]]

     or partial response actions at the vessel or facility;
       ``(F) the person does not impede the effectiveness or 
     integrity of any institutional control employed at the vessel 
     or facility; and
       ``(G) the person complies with any request for information 
     or administrative subpoena issued by the President under this 
     Act.
       ``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply in a case 
     in which the material containing a hazardous substance 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) contributed significantly or 
     could contribute significantly to the cost of the response 
     action with respect to the facility.
       ``(t) Municipal Solid Waste and Sewage Sludge Exemption and 
     Limitations.--
       ``(1) Contribution of municipal solid waste and municipal 
     sewage sludge.--
       ``(A) In general.--The condition stated in this 
     subparagraph is that the liability of the potentially 
     responsible party is for response costs based on paragraph 
     (3) or (4) of subsection (a) and on the potentially 
     responsible party's having arranged for disposal or treatment 
     of, arranged with a transporter for transport for disposal or 
     treatment of, or accepted for transport for disposal or 
     treatment of, municipal solid waste or municipal sewage 
     sludge at a facility listed on the National Priorities List.
       ``(B) Settlement amount.--
       ``(i) In general.--The President shall offer a settlement 
     to a party referred to in clause (i) with respect to 
     liability under paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (a) on the 
     basis of a payment of $5.30 per ton of municipal solid waste 
     or municipal sewage sludge that the President estimates is 
     attributable to the party.
       ``(ii) Revision.--

       ``(I) In general.--The President may revise the settlement 
     amount under clause (i) by regulation.
       ``(II) Basis.--A revised settlement amount under subclause 
     (I) shall reflect the estimated per-ton cost of closure and 
     post-closure activities at a representative facility 
     containing only municipal solid waste.

       ``(C) Conditions.--The provisions for settlement described 
     in this subparagraph shall not apply with respect to a 
     facility where there is no waste except municipal solid waste 
     or municipal sewage sludge.
       ``(D) Adjustment for inflation.--The Administrator may by 
     guidance periodically adjust the settlement amount under 
     subparagraph (B) to reflect changes in the Consumer Price 
     Index (or other appropriate index, as determined by the 
     Administrator).
       ``(2) Municipal owners and operators.--
       ``(A) Aggregate liability of large municipalities.--
       ``(i) In general.--With respect to a codisposal landfill 
     that is owned or operated in whole or in part by 
     municipalities with a population of 100,000 or more 
     (according to the 1990 census), and that is not subject to 
     the criteria for solid waste landfills published under 
     subtitle D of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6941 et 
     seq.) at part 258 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations 
     (or a successor regulation), the aggregate amount of 
     liability of such municipal owners and operators for response 
     costs under this section shall be not greater than 20 percent 
     of such costs.
       ``(ii) Increased amount.--The President may increase the 
     percentage under clause (i) to not more than 35 percent with 
     respect to a municipality if the President determines that 
     the municipality committed specific acts that exacerbated 
     environmental contamination or exposure with respect to the 
     facility.
       ``(iii) Decreased amount.--The President may decrease the 
     percentage under clause (i) with respect to a municipality to 
     not less than 10 percent if the President determines that the 
     municipality took specific acts of mitigation during the 
     operation of the facility to avoid environmental 
     contamination or exposure with respect to the facility.
       ``(B) Aggregate liability of small municipalities.--
       ``(i) In general.--With respect to a codisposal landfill 
     that is owned or operated in whole or in part by 
     municipalities with a population of less than 100,000 
     (according to the 1990 census), that is not subject to the 
     criteria for solid waste landfills published under subtitle D 
     of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6941 et seq.) at 
     part 258 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (or a 
     successor regulation), the aggregate amount of liability of 
     such municipal owners and operators for response costs under 
     this section shall be not greater than 10 percent of such 
     costs.
       ``(ii) Increased amount.--The President may increase the 
     percentage under clause (i) to not more than 20 percent with 
     respect to a municipality if the President determines that 
     the municipality committed specific acts that exacerbated 
     environmental contamination or exposure with respect to the 
     facility.
       ``(iii) Decreased amount.--The President may decrease the 
     percentage under clause (i) with respect to a municipality to 
     not less than 5 percent if the President determines that the 
     municipality took specific acts of mitigation during the 
     operation of the facility to avoid environmental 
     contamination or exposure with respect to the facility.
       ``(3) Applicability.--This subsection shall not apply to--
       ``(A) a person that acted in violation of subtitle C of the 
     Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) at a 
     facility that is subject to a response action under this 
     title, if the violation pertains to a hazardous substance the 
     release of threat of release of which caused the incurrence 
     of response costs at the facility;
       ``(B) a person that owned or operated a codisposal landfill 
     in violation of the applicable requirements for municipal 
     solid waste landfill units under subtitle D of the Solid 
     Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6941 et seq.) after October 9, 
     1991, if the violation pertains to a hazardous substance the 
     release of threat of release of which caused the incurrence 
     of response costs at the facility; or
       ``(C) a person under section 122(p)(2)(G).
       ``(4) Performance of response actions.--As a condition of a 
     settlement with a municipality under this subsection, the 
     President may require that the municipality perform or 
     participate in the performance of the response actions at the 
     facility.
       ``(5) Notice of applicability.--The President shall provide 
     a potentially responsible party with notice of the potential 
     applicability of this section in each written communication 
     with the party concerning the potential liability of the 
     party.
       ``(u) Recycling Transactions.--
       ``(1) Liability clarification.--As provided in paragraphs 
     (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this subsection, a person who 
     arranged for the recycling of recyclable material or 
     transported such material shall not be liable under 
     paragraphs (3) or (4) of subsection (a) with respect to such 
     material. A determination whether or not any person shall be 
     liable under paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (a) for any 
     transaction not covered by paragraphs (2) and (3), (4), or 
     (5) of this subsection shall be made, without regard to 
     paragraphs (2), (3), (4) and (5) of this subsection, on a 
     case-by-case basis, based on the individual facts and 
     circumstances of such transaction.
       ``(2) Recyclable material defined.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term `recyclable material' means scrap paper, 
     scrap plastic, scrap glass, scrap textiles, scrap rubber 
     (other than whole tires), scrap metal, or spent lead-acid, 
     spent nickel-cadmium, and other spent batteries, as well as 
     minor amounts of material incident to or adhering to the 
     scrap material as a result of its normal and customary use 
     prior to becoming scrap; except that such term shall not 
     include--
       ``(A) shipping containers with a capacity from 30 liters to 
     3,000 liters, whether intact or not, having any hazardous 
     substance (but not metal bits and pieces or hazardous 
     substance that form an integral part of the container) 
     contained in or adhering thereto; or
       ``(B) any item of material containing polychlorinated 
     biphenyls (PCBs) in excess of 50 parts per million (ppm) or 
     any new standard promulgated pursuant to applicable Federal 
     laws.
       ``(3) Transactions involving scrap paper, plastic, glass, 
     textiles, or rubber.--Transactions involving scrap paper, 
     scrap plastic, scrap glass, scrap textiles, or scrap rubber 
     (other than whole tires) shall be deemed to be arranging for 
     recycling if the person who arranged for the transaction (by 
     selling recyclable material or otherwise arranging for the 
     recycling of recyclable material) can demonstrate by a 
     preponderance of the evidence that all of the following 
     criteria were met at the time of the transaction:
       ``(A) The recyclable material met a commercial 
     specification grade.
       ``(B) A market existed for the recyclable material.
       ``(C) A substantial portion of the recyclable material was 
     made available for use as feedstock for the manufacture of a 
     new saleable product.
       ``(D) The recyclable material could have been a replacement 
     or substitute for a virgin raw material, or the product to be 
     made from the recyclable material could have been a 
     replacement or substitute for a product made, in whole or in 
     part, from a virgin raw material.
       ``(E) For transactions occurring 90 days or more after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, the person exercised 
     reasonable care to determine that the facility where the 
     recyclable material was handled, processed, reclaimed, or 
     otherwise managed by another person (hereinafter in this 
     subsection referred to as a `consuming facility') was in 
     compliance with substantive (not procedural or 
     administrative) provisions of any Federal, State, or local 
     environmental law or regulation, or compliance order or 
     decree issued pursuant thereto, applicable to the handling, 
     processing, reclamation, storage, or other management 
     activities associated with recyclable material.
       ``(F) For purposes of this paragraph, `reasonable care' 
     shall be determined using criteria that include (but are not 
     limited to)--
       ``(i) the price paid in the recycling transaction;
       ``(ii) the ability of the person to detect the nature of 
     the consuming facility's operations concerning its handling, 
     processing, reclamation, or other management activities 
     associated with recyclable material; and
       ``(iii) the result of inquiries made to the appropriate 
     Federal, State, or local environmental agency (or agencies) 
     regarding the

[[Page 19940]]

     consuming facility's past and current compliance with 
     substantive (not procedural or administrative) provisions of 
     any Federal, State, or local environmental law or regulation, 
     or compliance order or decree issued pursuant thereto, 
     applicable to the handling, processing, reclamation, storage, 
     or other management activities associated with the recyclable 
     material. For the purposes of this subparagraph, a 
     requirement to obtain a permit applicable to the handling, 
     processing, reclamation, or other management activity 
     associated with the recyclable materials shall be deemed to 
     be a substantive provision.
       ``(4) Transactions involving scrap metal.--
       ``(A) Transactions involving scrap metal shall be deemed to 
     be arranging for recycling if the person who arranged for the 
     transaction (by selling recyclable material or otherwise 
     arranging for the recycling of recyclable material) can 
     demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that at the 
     time of the transaction--
       ``(i) the person met the criteria set forth in paragraph 
     (3) with respect to the scrap metal;
       ``(ii) the person was in compliance with any applicable 
     regulations or standards regarding the storage, transport, 
     management, or other activities associated with the recycling 
     of scrap metal that the Administrator promulgates under the 
     Solid Waste Disposal Act subsequent to the enactment of this 
     subsection and with regard to transactions occurring after 
     the effective date of such regulations or standards; and
       ``(iii) the person did not melt the scrap metal prior to 
     the transaction.
       ``(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A)(iii), melting of 
     scrap metal does not include the thermal separation of 2 or 
     more materials due to differences in their melting points 
     (referred to as `sweating').
       ``(C) For purposes of this paragraph, the term `scrap 
     metal' means--
       ``(i) bits and pieces of metal parts (e.g., bars, turnings, 
     rods, sheets, wire) or metal pieces that may be combined 
     together with bolts or soldering (e.g., radiators, scrap 
     automobiles, railroad box cars), which when worn or 
     superfluous can be recycled; and
       ``(ii) notwithstanding subparagraph (A)(iii), metal 
     byproducts from copper and copper-based alloys that--

       ``(I) are not 1 of the primary products of a secondary 
     production process;
       ``(II) are not solely or separately produced by the 
     production process;
       ``(III) are not stored in a pile or surface impoundment; 
     and
       ``(IV) are sold to another recycler that is not 
     speculatively accumulating such metal byproducts;

     except for scrap metals that the Administrator excludes from 
     this definition by regulation.
       ``(5) Transactions involving batteries.--Transactions 
     involving spent lead-acid batteries, spent nickel-cadmium 
     batteries, or other spent batteries shall be deemed to be 
     arranging for recycling if the person who arranged for the 
     transaction (by selling recyclable material or otherwise 
     arranging for the recycling of recyclable material) can 
     demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that at the 
     time of the transaction--
       ``(A) the person met the criteria set forth in paragraph 
     (3) with respect to the spent lead-acid batteries, spent 
     nickel-cadmium batteries, or other spent batteries, but the 
     person did not recover the valuable components of such 
     batteries; and
       ``(B)(i) with respect to transactions involving lead-acid 
     batteries, the person was in compliance with applicable 
     Federal environmental regulations or standards, and any 
     amendments thereto, regarding the storage, transport, 
     management, or other activities associated with the recycling 
     of spent lead-acid batteries;
       ``(ii) with respect to transactions involving nickel-
     cadmium batteries, Federal environmental regulations or 
     standards are in effect regarding the storage, transport, 
     management, or other activities associated with the recycling 
     of spent nickel-cadmium batteries, and the person was in 
     compliance with applicable regulations or standards or any 
     amendments thereto; or
       ``(iii) with respect to transactions involving other spent 
     batteries, Federal environmental regulations or standards are 
     in effect regarding the storage, transport, management, or 
     other activities associated with the recycling of such 
     batteries, and the person was in compliance with applicable 
     regulations or standards or any amendments thereto.
       ``(6) Exclusions.--
       ``(A) The exemptions set forth in paragraphs (3), (4), and 
     (5) shall not apply if--
       ``(i) the person had an objectively reasonable basis to 
     believe at the time of the recycling transaction--

       ``(I) that the recyclable material would not be recycled;

       ``(II) that the recyclable material would be burned as 
     fuel, or for energy recovery or incineration; or
       ``(III) for transactions occurring before 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this subsection, that the consuming 
     facility was not in compliance with a substantive (not 
     procedural or administrative) provision of any Federal, 
     State, or local environmental law or regulation, or 
     compliance order or decree issued pursuant thereto, 
     applicable to the handling, processing, reclamation, or other 
     management activities associated with the recyclable 
     material;

       ``(ii) the person had reason to believe that hazardous 
     substances had been added to the recyclable material for 
     purposes other than processing for recycling; or
       ``(iii) the person failed to exercise reasonable care with 
     respect to the management and handling of the recyclable 
     material (including adhering to customary industry practices 
     current at the time of the recycling transaction designed to 
     minimize, through source control, contamination of the 
     recyclable material by hazardous substances).
       ``(B) For purposes of this paragraph, an objectively 
     reasonable basis for belief shall be determined using 
     criteria that include (but are not limited to) the size of 
     the person's business, customary industry practices 
     (including customary industry practices current at the time 
     of the recycling transaction designed to minimize, through 
     source control, contamination of the recyclable material by 
     hazardous substances), the price paid in the recycling 
     transaction, and the ability of the person to detect the 
     nature of the consuming facility's operations concerning its 
     handling, processing, reclamation, or other management 
     activities associated with the recyclable material.
       ``(C) For purposes of this paragraph, a requirement to 
     obtain a permit applicable to the handling, processing, 
     reclamation, or other management activities associated with 
     recyclable material shall be deemed to be a substantive 
     provision.
       ``(D) Limitation on statutory construction.--Nothing in 
     this subsection--
       ``(i) affects any rights, defenses, or liabilities under 
     section 107(a) of any person with respect to any transaction 
     involving any material other than a recyclable material 
     subject to paragraph (1) of this subsection; or
       ``(ii) relieves a plaintiff of the burden of proof that the 
     elements of liability under section 107(a) are met under the 
     particular circumstances of any transaction for which 
     liability is alleged.
       ``(v) Recycling Transactions Involving Used Oil.--
       ``(1) Definition of used oil.--In this subsection, the term 
     `used oil' has the meaning given the term in section 1004 of 
     the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6903), except that 
     the term--
       ``(A) includes any synthetic oil; and
       ``(B) does not include an oil that is subject to regulation 
     under section 6(e)(10)(A) of the Toxic Substances Control Act 
     (15 U.S.C. 2605(e)(10)(A)).
       ``(2) Transactions involving used oil.--Transactions 
     involving recyclable material that consists of used oil shall 
     be considered to be arranging for recycling if the person 
     that arranged for the transaction (by selling recyclable 
     material or otherwise arranging for the recycling of 
     recyclable material)--
       ``(A) did not mix the recyclable material with a hazardous 
     substance following the removal of the used oil from service; 
     and
       ``(B) demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence 
     that--
       ``(i) at the time of the transaction, the recyclable 
     material was sent to a facility that recycled used oil by 
     using it as a feedstock for the manufacture of a new saleable 
     product; or
       ``(ii)(I) at the time of the transaction, the recyclable 
     material or the product to be made from the recyclable 
     material could have been a replacement or substitute, in 
     whole or in part, for a virgin raw material;
       ``(II) in the case of a transaction occurring on or after 
     the date that is 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
     section, the person exercised reasonable care to determine 
     that the facility where the recyclable material would be 
     handled, processed, reclaimed, or otherwise managed by 
     another person was in compliance with substantive provisions 
     of any Federal, State, or local environmental law (including 
     a regulation promulgated or a compliance order or decree 
     issued under the law) that is applicable to the handling, 
     processing, reclamation, storage, or other management 
     activities associated with the recyclable material; and
       ``(III) the person was in compliance with any regulations 
     or standards for the management of used oil promulgated under 
     the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) that 
     were in effect on the date of the transaction.
       ``(3) Reasonable care.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     reasonable care shall be determined using criteria that 
     include--
       ``(A) the price paid in the recycling transaction;
       ``(B) the ability of the person to detect the nature of the 
     consuming facility's operations concerning its handling, 
     processing, reclamation, or other management activities 
     associated with the recyclable material; and
       ``(C) the result of inquiries made to the appropriate 
     Federal, State, or local environmental agency (or agencies) 
     regarding the consuming facility's past and current 
     compliance with substantive provisions of any Federal, State, 
     or local environmental law (including a regulation 
     promulgated or a compliance order or decree issued under the 
     law), applicable to the handling, processing,

[[Page 19941]]

     reclamation, storage, or other management activities 
     associated with recyclable material.
       ``(w) Limitation of Liability of Railroad Owners.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), a person 
     that substantially complies with paragraph (2) with respect 
     to a facility shall not be liable under this Act to the 
     extent that liability is based solely on the status of the 
     person as a railroad owner or operator of a spur track 
     (including a spur track over land subject to an easement), to 
     a facility that is owned or operated by a person that is not 
     affiliated with the railroad owner or operator, if--
       ``(A) the spur track provides access to a main line or 
     branch line track that is owned or operated by the railroad;
       ``(B) the spur track is not more than 10 miles long; and
       ``(C) the railroad owner or operator does not cause or 
     contribute to a release or threatened release at the spur 
     track.
       ``(2) Requirements for limitation of liability.--The 
     requirement of this paragraph is that--
       ``(A) to the extent that the person has operational control 
     over a facility--
       ``(i) the person provides full cooperation to, assistance 
     to, and access to the facility by, persons that are 
     responsible for response actions at the facility (including 
     the cooperation and access necessary for the installation, 
     integrity, operation, and maintenance of any complete or 
     partial response action at the facility); and
       ``(ii) the person takes no action to impede the 
     effectiveness or integrity of any institutional control 
     employed under section 121 at the facility; and
       ``(B) the person complies with any request for information 
     or administrative subpoena issued by the President under this 
     Act.
       ``(x) Religious, Charitable, Scientific, and Educational 
     Organizations.--
       ``(1) Limitation on liability.--Subject to paragraph (2), 
     if an organization described in section 101(20)(I) holds 
     legal or equitable title to a vessel or facility as a result 
     of a charitable gift that is allowable as a deduction under 
     section 170, 2055, or 2522 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (determined without regard to dollar limitations), the 
     liability of the organization shall be limited to the lesser 
     of the fair market value of the vessel or facility or the 
     actual proceeds of the sale of the vessel or facility 
     received by the organization.
       ``(2) Conditions.--In order for an organization described 
     in section 101(20)(I) to be eligible for the limited 
     liability described in paragraph (1), the organization 
     shall--
       ``(A) substantially comply with the requirement of 
     subsection (y) with respect to the vessel or facility;
       ``(B) provide full cooperation and assistance to the United 
     States in identifying and locating persons who recently 
     owned, operated, or otherwise controlled activities at the 
     vessel or facility;
       ``(C) establish by a preponderance of the evidence that all 
     active disposal of hazardous substances at the vessel or 
     facility occurred before the organization acquired the vessel 
     or facility; and
       ``(D) establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the 
     organization did not cause or contribute to a release or 
     threatened release of hazardous substances at the vessel or 
     facility.
       ``(3) Limitation.--Nothing in this subsection affects the 
     liability of a person other than a person described in 
     section 101(20)(I) that meets the conditions specified in 
     paragraph (2).''.
       (2) Transition rules.--
       (A) In general.--The exemptions under subsections (q), (r), 
     (s), (v), and (w) of section 107 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607(q), 9607(r), 9607(s)) (as added by 
     paragraph (1)) shall not apply to any administrative 
     settlement or any settlement or judgment approved by a United 
     States Federal District Court--
       (i) before the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (ii) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (B) Effect on pending or concluded actions.--The exemptions 
     provided in subsection (u) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9607(u)) (as added by paragraph (1)) shall not affect any 
     concluded judicial or administrative action or any pending 
     judicial action initiated by the United States prior to the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Service Station Dealers.--Section 114(c) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9614(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``No person'' and inserting ``A person'';
       (B) by striking ``may recover'' and inserting ``may not 
     recover'';
       (C) by striking ``if such recycled oil'' and inserting 
     ``unless the service station dealer''; and
       (D) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A) mixed the recycled oil with any other hazardous 
     substance; or
       ``(B) did not store, treat, transport, or otherwise manage 
     the recycled oil in compliance with any applicable 
     regulations or standards promulgated under section 3014 of 
     the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6935) and other 
     applicable authorities that were in effect on the date of 
     such activity.''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (4).

     SEC. 302. EXPEDITED SETTLEMENT FOR CERTAIN PARTIES.

       (a) Parties Eligible.--Section 122(g) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9622(g)) is amended--
       (1) by striking the subsection heading and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(g) Expedited Final Settlement.--'';
       (2) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
       (B) by striking ``(1)'' and all that follows through 
     subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Parties eligible.--
       ``(A) In general.--As expeditiously as practicable, the 
     President shall--
       ``(i) notify each potentially responsible party that meets 
     1 or more of the conditions stated in subparagraphs (B), (C), 
     and (D) of the party's eligibility for a settlement; and
       ``(ii) offer to reach a final administrative or judicial 
     settlement with the party.
       ``(B) De minimis contribution.--The condition stated in 
     this subparagraph is that the liability is for response costs 
     based on paragraph (3) or (4) of section 107(a) and the 
     party's contribution of a hazardous substance at a facility 
     is de minimis. For the purposes of this subparagraph, a 
     potentially responsible party's contribution shall be 
     considered to be de minimis only if the President determines 
     that both of the following criteria are met:
       ``(i) Minimal amount of material.--The amount of material 
     containing a hazardous substance contributed by the 
     potentially responsible party to the facility is minimal 
     relative to the total amount of material containing hazardous 
     substances at the facility. The amount of a potentially 
     responsible party's contribution shall be presumed to be 
     minimal if the amount is 1 percent or less of the total 
     amount of material containing a hazardous substance at the 
     facility, unless the Administrator promptly identifies a 
     greater threshold based on site-specific factors.
       ``(ii) Hazardous effects.--The material containing a 
     hazardous substance contributed by the potentially 
     responsible party does not present toxic or other hazardous 
     effects that are significantly greater than the toxic or 
     other hazardous effects of other material containing a 
     hazardous substance at the facility.'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (A))--
       (i) by redesignating clauses (i) through (iii) as 
     subclauses (I) through (III), respectively, and adjusting the 
     margins appropriately;
       (ii) by striking ``(C) The potentially responsible party'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(C) Owners of real property.--
       ``(i) In general.--The condition stated in this 
     subparagraph is that the potentially responsible party''; and
       (iii) by striking ``This subparagraph (B)'' and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(ii) Applicability.--Clause (i)''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Reduction in settlement amount based on limited 
     ability to pay.--
       ``(i) In general.--The condition stated in this 
     subparagraph is that--

       ``(I) the potentially responsible party is--

       ``(aa) a natural person;
       ``(bb) a small business; or
       ``(cc) a municipality;

       ``(II) the potentially responsible party demonstrates an 
     inability to pay or has only a limited ability to pay 
     response costs, as determined by the Administrator under a 
     regulation promulgated by the Administrator, after--

       ``(aa) public notice and opportunity for comment; and
       ``(bb) consultation with the Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration and the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development; and

       ``(III) in the case of a potentially responsible party that 
     is a small business, the potentially responsible party does 
     not qualify for the small business exemption under section 
     107(s) because of the application of section 107(s)(2).

       ``(ii) Small businesses.--

       ``(I) Definition of small business.--In this subparagraph, 
     the term `small business' means a business entity that--

       ``(aa) during the taxable year preceding the date of 
     transmittal of notification that the business is a 
     potentially responsible party, had full- and part-time 
     employees whose combined time was equivalent to that of 75 or 
     fewer full-time employees or for that taxable year reported 
     $3,000,000 or less in gross revenue; and
       ``(bb) is not affiliated through any familial or corporate 
     relationship with any person that is or was a party 
     potentially responsible for response costs at the facility.

       ``(II) Considerations.--At the request of a small business, 
     the President shall take into consideration the ability of 
     the small business to pay response costs and still maintain 
     its basic business operations, including--

[[Page 19942]]

       ``(aa) consideration of the overall financial condition of 
     the small business; and
       ``(bb) demonstrable constraints on the ability of the small 
     business to raise revenues.

       ``(III) Information.--A small business requesting 
     settlement under this paragraph shall promptly provide the 
     President with all information needed to determine the 
     ability of the small business to pay response costs.
       ``(IV) Determination.--A small business shall demonstrate 
     the extent of its ability to pay response costs, and the 
     President shall perform any analysis that the President 
     determines may assist in demonstrating the impact of a 
     settlement on the ability of the small business to maintain 
     its basic operations. The President, in the discretion of the 
     President, may perform such an analysis for any other party 
     or request the other party to perform the analysis.
       ``(V) Alternative payment methods.--If the President 
     determines that a small business is unable to pay its total 
     settlement amount immediately, the President shall consider 
     such alternative payment methods as may be necessary or 
     appropriate.

       ``(iii) Municipalities.--

       ``(I) Considerations.--The President shall consider the 
     inability or limited ability to pay of a municipality to the 
     extent that the municipality provides information with 
     respect to--

       ``(aa) the general obligation bond rating and information 
     about the most recent bond issue for which the rating was 
     prepared;
       ``(bb) the amount of total available funds (other than 
     dedicated funds or State assistance payments for remediation 
     of inactive hazardous waste sites);
       ``(cc) the amount of total operating revenues (other than 
     obligated or encumbered revenues);
       ``(dd) the amount of total expenses;
       ``(ee) the amounts of total debt and debt service;
       ``(ff) per capita income and cost of living;
       ``(gg) real property values;
       ``(hh) unemployment information; and
       ``(ii) population information.

       ``(II) Evaluation of impact.--A municipality may submit for 
     consideration by the President an evaluation of the potential 
     impact of the settlement on the provision of municipal 
     services and the feasibility of making delayed payments or 
     payments over time.
       ``(III) Risk of default or violation.--A municipality may 
     establish an inability to pay for purposes of this 
     subparagraph by showing that payment of its liability under 
     this Act would--

       ``(aa) create a substantial demonstrable risk that the 
     municipality would default on debt obligations existing as of 
     the time of the showing, go into bankruptcy, be forced to 
     dissolve, or be forced to make budgetary cutbacks that would 
     substantially reduce the level of protection of public health 
     and safety; or
       ``(bb) necessitate a violation of legal requirements or 
     limitations of general applicability concerning the 
     assumption and maintenance of fiscal municipal obligations.

       ``(IV) Other factors relevant to settlements with 
     municipalities.--In determining an appropriate settlement 
     amount with a municipality under this subparagraph, the 
     President may consider other relevant factors, including the 
     fair market value of any in-kind services that the 
     municipality may provide to support the response action at 
     the facility.

       ``(iv) Other potentially responsible parties.--This 
     subparagraph does not affect the President's authority to 
     evaluate the ability to pay of a potentially responsible 
     party other than a natural person, small business, or 
     municipality or to enter into a settlement with such other 
     party based on that party's ability to pay.
       ``(E) Additional conditions for expedited settlements.--
       ``(i) Basis of determination.--If the President determines 
     that a potentially responsible party is not eligible for 
     settlement under this paragraph, the President shall state 
     the reasons for the determination in writing to any 
     potentially responsible party that requests a settlement 
     under this paragraph.''.
       (b) Settlement Offers.--Section 122(g) of the Comprehensive 
     Environment Response, Liability, and Compensation Act of 1980 
     (42 U.S.C. 9622(g)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
       ``(6) Settlement offers.--
       ``(A) Notification.--As soon as practicable after receipt 
     of sufficient information to make a determination, the 
     Administrator shall notify any person that the Administrator 
     determines is eligible under paragraph (1) of the person's 
     eligibility for the expedited final settlement.
       ``(B) Offers.--As soon as practicable after receipt of 
     sufficient information, the Administrator shall submit a 
     written settlement offer to each person that the 
     Administrator determines, based on information available to 
     the Administrator at the time at which the determination is 
     made, to be eligible for a settlement under paragraph (1).
       ``(C) Information.--At the time at which the Administrator 
     submits an offer under paragraph (1), the Administrator 
     shall, at the request of the recipient of the offer, make 
     available to the recipient any information available under 
     section 552 of title 5, United States Code, on which the 
     Administrator bases the settlement offer, and if the 
     settlement offer is based in whole or in part on information 
     not available under that section, so inform the recipient.''.

     SEC. 303. FAIR SHARE SETTLEMENTS AND STATUTORY ORPHAN SHARES.

       (a) In General.--Section 122 of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9622) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(n) Fair Share Allocation.--
       ``(1) Process.--The President shall initiate an impartial 
     fare share allocation, conducted by a neutral third party, at 
     National Priorities List facilities, if--
       ``(A) there is more than 1 potentially responsible party 
     that is not--
       ``(i) eligible for an exemption or limitation under 
     subsection (q), (r), (s), (t), (u), (v), (w), or (x) of 
     section 107;
       ``(ii) eligible for a settlement under subsection (g); or
       ``(iii) insolvent, bankrupt, or defunct; and
       ``(B) 1 or more of the potentially responsible parties 
     agree to bear the costs of the allocation (which shall be 
     considered to be response costs under this Act) under such 
     conditions as the President may prescribe.
       ``(2) Pre-allocation settlements.--
       ``(A) In general.--Before initiating the allocation, the 
     President may--
       ``(i) provide a 90-day period of negotiation; and
       ``(ii) extend the period of negotiation described in clause 
     (i) for an additional 90 days.
       ``(B) Alternative dispute resolution.--The President may 
     use the services of an alternative dispute resolution neutral 
     to assist in negotiations.
       ``(C) Settlement.--On expiration of a negotiation period 
     described in subparagraph (A), the President may offer to 
     settle the liability of 1 or more of the parties.
       ``(D) Response action.--
       ``(i) In general.--As a condition of a settlement under 
     this subsection, the President may require 1 or more parties 
     to conduct a response action at the facility.
       ``(ii) Funding and costs.--An agreement for a required 
     response action described in clause (i) may include mixed 
     funding under this section, including the forgiveness of past 
     costs.
       ``(3) Expedited allocation.--
       ``(A) In general.--At the request of any party subject to 
     the allocation, the allocator may first accept the 
     President's estimate of the statutory orphan share specified 
     under subsection (o).
       ``(B) Settlement based on statutory orphan share.--The 
     President may offer to settle the liability of any party 
     based on--
       ``(i) the statutory orphan share as accepted by the 
     allocator;
       ``(ii) the party's pro rata share of the statutory orphan; 
     and
       ``(iii) other terms and conditions acceptable to the United 
     States.
       ``(4) Factors.--In conducting an allocation under this 
     subsection, the allocator, without regard to any theory of 
     joint and several liability, shall estimate the fair share of 
     each potentially responsible party using principles of 
     equity, the best information reasonably available to the 
     President, and the following factors:
       ``(A) the quantity of hazardous substances contributed by 
     each party;
       ``(B) the degree of toxicity of hazardous substances 
     contributed by each party;
       ``(C) the mobility of hazardous substances contributed by 
     each party;
       ``(D) the degree of involvement of each party in the 
     generation, transportation, treatment, storage, or disposal 
     of hazardous substances;
       ``(E) the degree of care exercised by each party with 
     respect to hazardous substances, taking into account the 
     characteristics of the hazardous substances;
       ``(F) the cooperation of each party in contributing to any 
     response action and in providing complete and timely 
     information to the United States or the allocator; and
       ``(G) such other equitable factors as the President 
     considers appropriate.
       ``(5) Scope.--A fair share allocation under this subsection 
     shall include any response costs at a National Priorities 
     List facility that are not addressed in an administrative 
     settlement or a settlement or a judgment approved by a United 
     States Federal District Court.
       ``(6) Settlements based on allocations.--
       ``(A) In general.--A party may settle any liability to the 
     United States for response costs under this Act for its 
     allocated fair share, including a reasonable risk premium 
     that reflects uncertainties existing at the time of 
     settlement.
       ``(B) Completion of obligations.--A person that is 
     undertaking a response action under an administrative order 
     issued under section 106 or has entered into a settlement 
     decree with the United States of a State as of the date of 
     enactment of this subsection shall complete the person's 
     obligations under the order or settlement decree.
       ``(C) Joint rejection.--The President and the Attorney 
     General may jointly reject an allocation report, in writing, 
     if--

[[Page 19943]]

       ``(i) the allocation does not provide a basis for 
     settlement that is fair, reasonable, and consistent with the 
     objectives of this Act; or
       ``(ii) the allocation process was directly and 
     substantially affected by bias, procedural error, fraud, or 
     unlawful conduct.
       ``(D) Subsequent allocation.--
       ``(i) In general.--If the Administrator and the Attorney 
     General jointly reject an allocation report under 
     subparagraph (C), the President shall initiate another 
     impartial fair share allocation.
       ``(ii) Costs.--The United States shall bear 50 percent of 
     the costs of a subsequent allocation if an initial allocation 
     is rejected under subparagraph (C)(i).
       ``(7) Unfunded and unattributable shares.--Any share 
     attributable to an insolvent, defunct, or bankrupt party, or 
     a share that cannot be attributed to any particular party, 
     shall be allocated among any responsible parties not 
     described in subsection (q), (r), (s), (t), (u), (v), (w), or 
     (x) of section 107 or subsection (g) of this section.
       ``(8) Savings.--The President may use the authority under 
     this section to enter into settlement agreements with respect 
     to any response action that is the subject of an allocation 
     at any time.
       ``(9) Effect on principles of liability.--Except as 
     provided in paragraph (4), the authorization of an allocation 
     process under this section shall not modify or affect the 
     principles of liability under this title as determined by the 
     courts of the United States.
       ``(o) Statutory Orphan Shares.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the 
     statutory orphan share is the difference between--
       ``(A) the liability of a party described in subsection (q), 
     (s), (t), (u), (v), (w), or (x) of section 107 or subsection 
     (g) of this section; and
       ``(B) the President's estimate of the liability of the 
     party, notwithstanding any exemption from or limitation on 
     liability in this Act, for response costs that are not 
     addressed in an administrative settlement or a settlement or 
     judgment approved by a United States district court.
       ``(2) Determination of statutory orphan shares.--The 
     President shall include an estimate of the statutory orphan 
     share of a party described in section 107(t) or subsection 
     (g) of this section, based on the best information reasonably 
     available to the President, at any time at which the 
     President seeks judicial approval of a settlement with the 
     party.
       ``(3) Transition rule and subsequent settlements.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each settlement presented for judicial 
     approval on or after the date that is 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection shall include an estimate of 
     the statutory orphan share for each party described in 
     subsections (q), (s), and (u) of section 107 that is 
     otherwise liable at a facility for costs addressed in the 
     settlement.
       ``(B) Subsequent settlements.--The President shall include 
     in a subsequent settlement at the same facility a revised 
     statutory orphan share estimate if the President--
       ``(i) determines that the subsequent settlement includes a 
     new statutory orphan share; or
       ``(ii) has good cause to revise an earlier statutory orphan 
     share estimate.
       ``(4) Final settlements.--
       ``(A) In general.--An administrative settlement, or a 
     judicially-approved consent decree or settlement, shall 
     identify the statutory orphan share owing if the consent 
     decree or settlement includes all funding necessary to 
     complete remedial project construction for the last operable 
     unit at the facility.
       ``(B) Funding and reimbursement.--A consent decree or 
     settlement described in subparagraph (A) shall include 
     funding of statutory orphan shares in accordance with this 
     section to the extent funds are available.
       ``(C) Facilities under unilateral order only.--
       ``(i) In general.--At a facility proceeding under an order 
     under section 106(a) that includes all funding necessary to 
     complete remedial project construction for the last operable 
     unit at the facility, if the order has been issued to 1 or 
     more parties, and all other potentially responsible parties 
     not subject to the order at the facility are described in 
     subsection (q), (r), (s), (t), (u), (v), (w), or (x) of 
     section 107 or subsection (g) of this section or are 
     insolvent, bankrupt, or defunct, the Administrator shall, on 
     petition by the party performing under section 106(b), 
     calculate the statutory orphan share for the facility.
       ``(ii) Payment.--Payment of any statutory orphan share 
     under this subparagraph shall be made in accordance with 
     subsection (p)(2)(J), as if the parties had settled.
       ``(p) General Provisions Applicable to Statutory Orphan 
     Shares and Fair Share Settlements.--
       ``(1) In general.--A fair share settlement under subsection 
     (n) and a statutory orphan share under subsection (o) shall 
     be subject to paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Provisions applicable to statutory orphan shares and 
     fair share settlements.--
       ``(A) Stay of litigation and enforcement.--
       ``(i) In general.--All contribution and cost recovery 
     actions under this Act against each party described in 
     section 107(t) and subsection (g) of this section are stayed 
     until the Administrator offers those parties a settlement.
       ``(ii) Suspension of statute of limitations.--Any statute 
     of limitations applicable to an action described in clause 
     (i) is suspended during the period that a stay under this 
     subparagraph is in effect.
       ``(B) Failure or inability to comply.--If the President 
     fails to fund a statutory orphan share, reimburse a party, or 
     include a statutory orphan share estimate in any settlement 
     when required to do so under this Act, the President shall 
     not--
       ``(i) issue any new order under section 106 at the facility 
     to any non-Federal party; or
       ``(ii) commence or maintain any new or existing action to 
     recover response costs at the facility.
       ``(C) Amounts owed.--
       ``(i) Hazardous substance superfund management.--The 
     President may provide partial statutory orphan share funding 
     and partial reimbursement payments to a party on a schedule 
     that ensures an equitable distribution of payments to all 
     eligible parties on a timely basis.
       ``(ii) Priority.--The priority for partial payments shall 
     be based on the length of time that has passed since the 
     payment obligation arose.
       ``(iii) Payment from funds made available for subsequent 
     fiscal years.--Any amounts payable in excess of available 
     appropriations in any fiscal year shall be paid from amounts 
     made available for subsequent fiscal years, along with 
     interest on the unpaid balances at the rate equal to that of 
     the current average market yield on outstanding marketable 
     obligations of the United States with a maturity of 1 year.
       ``(D) Contribution protection.--
       ``(i) In general.--A settlement under this subsection, 
     subsection (g), or section 107(t) shall provide complete 
     protection from all claims for contribution or cost recovery 
     for response costs that are addressed in the settlement.
       ``(ii) Costs beyond scope of allocation.--In the case of 
     response costs at a facility that, as a result of a prior, 
     administrative or judicially-approved settlement at the 
     facility, are not within the scope of an allocation under 
     subsection (n), a party shall retain the right to seek cost 
     recovery or contribution from any other party in accordance 
     with the prior settlement, except that no party may seek 
     contribution for any response costs at the facility from--

       ``(I) a party described in subsection (q), (r), (s), (u), 
     (v), (w), or (x) of section 107; or
       ``(II) a party that has settled its liability under section 
     107(t) or subsection (g) of this section.

       ``(E) Liability for attorney's fees for certain actions.--A 
     person that, after the date of enactment of this subsection, 
     commences a civil action for contribution under this Act 
     against a person that is not liable by operation of 
     subsections (q), (r), (s), or (u) of section 107, or has 
     resolved its liability to the United States under subsection 
     (n), subsection (g), or section 107(t), shall be liable to 
     that person for all reasonable costs of defending the action, 
     including all reasonable attorney's fees and expert witness 
     fees.
       ``(F) Illegal activities.--Subsections (q), (r), (s), (t), 
     (u), (v), (w), and (x) of section 107 and subsection (g) of 
     this section shall not apply to--
       ``(i) any person whose liability for response costs under 
     section 107(a) is otherwise based on any act, omission, or 
     status that is determined by a court or administrative body 
     of competent jurisdiction, within the applicable statute of 
     limitation, to have been a violation of any Federal or State 
     law pertaining to the treatment, storage, disposal, or 
     handling of hazardous substances if the violation pertains to 
     a hazardous substance, the release or threat of release of 
     which caused the incurrence of response costs at the vessel 
     or facility;
       ``(ii) a person described in section 107(o); or
       ``(iii) a bona fide prospective purchaser.
       ``(G) Exception.--
       ``(i) In general.--The President may decline to reimburse 
     or offer a settlement to a potentially responsible party 
     under subsections (g) and (n) if the President makes a 
     decision concerning a reimbursement or offer of a settlement 
     under clause (ii).
       ``(ii) Requirements for reimbursement or offer of a 
     settlement.--A potentially responsible party may be denied a 
     reimbursement or settlement under clause (i)--

       ``(I) to the extent that the person or entity has 
     operational control over a vessel or facility, if--

       ``(aa) the person or entity fails to provide full 
     cooperation to, assistance to, and access to the vessel or 
     facility to persons that are responsible for response actions 
     at the vessel or facility (including the cooperation and 
     access necessary for the installation, integrity, operation, 
     and maintenance of any complete or partial response actions 
     at the vessel or facility); or
       ``(bb) the person or entity acts in such a way as to impede 
     the effectiveness or integrity of any institutional control 
     employed at the vessel or facility; or

       ``(II) if the person or entity fails to comply with any 
     request for information or administrative subpoena issued by 
     the President under this Act.

[[Page 19944]]

       ``(H) Basis of determination.--If the President determines 
     that a potentially responsible party is not eligible for 
     settlement under this paragraph, the President shall state 
     the reasons for the determination in writing to any 
     potentially responsible party that requests a settlement 
     under this paragraph.
       ``(I) Waiver.--
       ``(i) Response costs in allocation.--A party that settles 
     its liability under this subsection waives the right to seek 
     cost recovery or contribution under this Act for any response 
     costs that are addressed in the allocation.
       ``(ii) Response costs of facility.--A party that settles 
     its liability under subsection (g) or section 107(t) waives 
     its right to seek cost recovery or contribution under this 
     Act for any response costs at the facility.
       ``(J) Performance of response actions.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the President may require, as a condition of settlement under 
     subsection (n) and section 107(t), that 1 or more parties 
     conduct a response action at the facility.
       ``(ii) Reimbursement.--

       ``(I) In general.--The President shall reimburse a party 
     that settles its liability under subsection (n) or section 
     107(t) for response costs incurred in performing a response 
     action that exceed the amount of a settlement approved under 
     subsection (n) or section 107(t).
       ``(II) Pro rata reimbursement.--The President shall provide 
     equitable pro rata reimbursement to such parties on at least 
     an annual basis.

       ``(iii) Response actions.--No party described in 
     subsections (q), (r), (s), (u), (v), (w) or (x) of section 
     107 or subsection (g) of this section may be required to 
     perform a response action as a condition of settlement or 
     ordered to conduct a response action under section 106.
       ``(K) Judicial review.--
       ``(i) In general.--A court shall not approve any settlement 
     under this Act unless the settlement includes an estimate of 
     the statutory orphan share that is fair, reasonable and 
     consistent with this Act.
       ``(ii) Statutory orphan share settlement.--If a court 
     determines that an estimate of a statutory orphan share is 
     not fair, reasonable, or consistent with this Act, the court 
     may--

       ``(I) approve the settlement; and
       ``(II) disapprove and remand the estimate of the statutory 
     orphan share.''.

       (b) Regulations.--The President shall issue regulations to 
     implement this title not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Technical Amendment.--Section 106(b)(1) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9706(b)(1)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following: `The conduct or approval of 
     an allocation of liability under this Act, including any 
     settlement of liability with a party based on the allocation, 
     shall not constitute sufficient cause for any party 
     (including a party that settled its liability based on the 
     allocation) to willfully violate, or fail or refuse to comply 
     with, any order of the President under subsection (a).''.
       (d) Law Enforcement Agencies Not Included as Owner or 
     Operator.--Section 101(20)(D) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601(20(D)) is amended by inserting after 
     ``or control'' the following: ``through seizure or otherwise 
     in connection with law enforcement activity, or''.
       (e) Common Carriers.--Section 107(b)(3) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607(b)(3)) is amended by 
     striking ``a published tariff and acceptance'' and inserting 
     ``a contract''.

     SEC. 304. TREATMENT OF RELIGIOUS, CHARITABLE, SCIENTIFIC, AND 
                   EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AS OWNERS OR 
                   OPERATORS.

       Section 101(20) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9601(20)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(H) Religious, charitable, scientific, and educational 
     organizations.--The term `owner or operator' includes an 
     organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 that is organized and operated 
     exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, or 
     educational purposes and that holds legal or equitable title 
     to a vessel or facility.''.
        TITLE IV--REMEDY SELECTION AND NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES

     SEC. 401. SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL ACTIONS.

       (a) Preference for Treatment.--Section 121(b) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9621(b)) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Preference for treatment.--
       ``(A) In general.--For any discrete area containing a 
     principal hazardous constituent of a hazardous substance, 
     pollutant, or contaminant that, based on site specific 
     factors, presents a substantial risk to human health or the 
     environment because of--
       ``(i) the high toxicity of the principal hazardous 
     constituent; or
       ``(ii) the high mobility of the principal hazardous 
     constituent;

     the remedy selection process shall include a preference for a 
     remedial action that includes treatment that reduces the risk 
     posed by the principal hazardous constituent over remedial 
     actions that do not include such treatment.
       ``(B) Final containment.--With respect to a discrete area 
     described in subparagraph (A), the President may select a 
     final containment remedy at a landfill or mining site or 
     similar facility if--
       ``(i)(I) the discrete area is small relative to the overall 
     volume of waste or contamination being addressed;
       ``(II) the discrete area is not readily identifiable and 
     accessible; and
       ``(III) without the presence of the discrete area, 
     containment would have been selected as the appropriate 
     remedy under this subsection for the larger body of waste or 
     larger area of contamination in which the discrete area is 
     located; or
       ``(ii) the volume and size of the discrete area is 
     extraordinary compared to other facilities listed on the 
     National Priorities List, and, because of the volume, size, 
     and other characteristics of the discrete area, it is highly 
     unlikely that any treatment technology will be developed that 
     could be implemented at a reasonable cost.''.
       (b) Compliance With Federal and State Laws.--Section 
     121(d)(2) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9621(d)(2)) is amended by striking subparagraph (C) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(C) Compliance with federal and state laws.--
       ``(i) Applicable requirements.--

       ``(I) In general.--Subject to clause (iii), a remedial 
     action shall require, at the completion of the remedial 
     action, a level or standard of control for each hazardous 
     substance, pollutant, and contaminant that at least attains 
     the substantive requirements of all promulgated standards, 
     requirements, criteria, and limitations, under--

       ``(aa) each Federal environmental law, that are legally 
     applicable to the conduct or operation of the remedial action 
     or to the level of cleanup for hazardous substances, 
     pollutants, or contaminants addressed by the remedial action;
       ``(bb) any State environmental or facility siting law, that 
     are more stringent than any Federal standard, requirement, 
     criterion, or limitation and are legally applicable to the 
     conduct or operation of the remedial action or to the level 
     of cleanup for hazardous substances, pollutants, or 
     contaminants addressed by the remedial action, and that the 
     State demonstrates are of general applicability, publishes 
     and identifies to the President in a timely manner as being 
     applicable to the remedial action, and has consistently 
     applied to other remedial actions in the State; and
       ``(cc) any more stringent standard, requirement, criterion, 
     or limitation relating to an environmental or facility siting 
     law promulgated by the State after the date of enactment of 
     the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1999 that 
     the State demonstrates is of general applicability, publishes 
     and identifies to the President in a timely manner as being 
     applicable to the remedial action, and has consistently 
     applied to other remedial actions in the State.

       ``(II) Contaminated media.--Compliance with substantive 
     provisions of section 3004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 6924) shall not be required with respect to 
     return, replacement, or disposal of contaminated media 
     (including residuals of contaminated media and other solid 
     wastes generated onsite in the conduct of a remedial action) 
     into the same media in or very near then-existing areas of 
     contamination onsite at a facility.

       ``(ii) Applicability of requirements to response actions 
     conducted onsite.--No procedural or administrative 
     requirement of any Federal, State, or local law (including 
     any requirement for a permit) shall apply to a response 
     action that is conducted onsite at a facility if the response 
     action is selected and carried out in compliance with this 
     section.
       ``(iii) Waiver provisions.--

       ``(I) In general.--The President may select a remedial 
     action at a facility that meets the requirements of 
     subparagraph (B) that does not attain a level or standard of 
     control that is at least equivalent to an applicable 
     requirement described in clause (i)(I) if the President makes 
     any of the following findings:

       ``(aa) Part of remedial action.--The selected remedial 
     action is only part of a total remedial action that will 
     attain the applicable requirements of clause (i)(I) when the 
     total remedial action is completed.
       ``(bb) Greater risk.--Attainment of the requirements of 
     clause (i)(I) will result in greater risk to human health or 
     the environment than alternative options.
       ``(cc) Technical impracticability.--Attainment of the 
     requirements of clause (i)(I) is technically impracticable.
       ``(dd) Equivalent to standard of performance.--The selected 
     remedial action will attain a standard of performance that is 
     equivalent to that required under clause (i)(I) through use 
     of another method or approach.

[[Page 19945]]

       ``(ee) Inconsistent application.--With respect to a State 
     requirement made applicable under clause (i)(I), the State 
     has not consistently applied (or demonstrated the intention 
     to apply consistently) the requirement in similar 
     circumstances to other remedial actions in the State.
       ``(ff) Balance.--In the case of a remedial action to be 
     funded predominantly under section 104 using amounts from the 
     Fund, a selection of a remedial action that attains the level 
     or standard of control described in clause (i)(I) will not 
     provide a balance between the need for protection of public 
     health and welfare and the environment at the facility, and 
     the need to make amounts from the Fund available to respond 
     to other facilities that may present a threat to public 
     health or welfare or the environment, taking into 
     consideration the relative immediacy of the threats presented 
     by the various facilities.

       ``(II) Publication.--The President shall publish any 
     findings made under subclause (I), including an explanation 
     and appropriate documentation and an explanation of how the 
     selected remedial action meets the requirements of this 
     section.

       ``(D) No standard.--If no applicable Federal or State 
     standard is established for a specific hazardous substance, 
     pollutant, or contaminant, a remedial action shall attain a 
     standard that the President determines to be protective of 
     human health and the environment.''.

     SEC. 402. USE OF RISK ASSESSMENT IN REMEDY SELECTION.

       (a) In General.--Section 121(a) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9621(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``In selecting an appropriate remedial action, the 
     President shall conduct and utilize a facility-specific risk 
     evaluation in accordance with section 129.''.
       (b) Facility-Specific Risk Evaluations.--Title I of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) (as amended by 
     section 201(b)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 129. FACILITY-SPECIFIC RISK EVALUATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--The goal of a facility-specific risk 
     evaluation performed under this Act is to provide informative 
     and understandable estimates that neither minimize nor 
     exaggerate the current or potential risk posed by a facility.
       ``(b) Risk Evaluation Principles.--
       ``(1) In general.--A facility-specific risk evaluation 
     shall--
       ``(A)(i) use chemical-specific and facility-specific data 
     in preference to default assumptions whenever it is 
     practicable to obtain such data; or
       ``(ii) if it is not practicable to obtain such data, use a 
     range and distribution of realistic and scientifically 
     supportable default assumptions;
       ``(B) ensure that the exposed population and all current 
     and potential pathways and patterns of exposure are 
     evaluated;
       ``(C) consider the current or reasonably anticipated future 
     use of the land and water resources in estimating exposure; 
     and
       ``(D) consider the use of institutional controls that 
     comply with the requirements of section 121.
       ``(2) Criteria for use of science.--Any chemical-specific 
     and facility-specific data or default assumptions used in 
     connection with a facility-specific risk evaluation shall be 
     consistent with the criteria for the use of science in 
     decisionmaking stated in subsection (e).
       ``(3) Institutional controls.--In conducting a risk 
     assessment to determine the need for remedial action, the 
     President may consider only institutional controls that are 
     in place at the facility at the time at which the risk 
     assessment is conducted.
       ``(c) Uses.--A facility-specific risk evaluation shall be 
     used to--
       ``(1) determine the need for remedial action;
       ``(2) evaluate the current and potential hazards, 
     exposures, and risks at the facility;
       ``(3) screen out potential contaminants, areas, or exposure 
     pathways from further study at a facility;
       ``(4) evaluate the protectiveness of alternative remedial 
     actions proposed for a facility;
       ``(5) demonstrate that the remedial action selected for a 
     facility is capable of protecting human health and the 
     environment considering the current and reasonably 
     anticipated future use of the land and water resources; and
       ``(6) establish protective concentration levels if no 
     applicable requirement under section 121(d)(2)(c) exists or 
     if an otherwise applicable requirement is not sufficiently 
     protective of human health and the environment.
       ``(d) Risk Communication Principles.--In carrying out this 
     section, the President shall ensure that the presentation of 
     information on public health effects is comprehensive, 
     informative, and understandable. The document reporting the 
     results of a facility-specific risk evaluation shall specify, 
     to the extent practicable--
       ``(1) each population addressed by any estimate of public 
     health effects;
       ``(2) the expected risk or central estimate of risk for the 
     specific populations;
       ``(3) each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound estimate 
     of risk;
       ``(4) each significant uncertainty identified in the 
     process of the assessment of public health effects and 
     research that would assist in resolving the uncertainty; and
       ``(5) peer-reviewed studies known to the President that 
     support, are directly relevant to, or fail to support any 
     estimate of public health effects and the methodology used to 
     reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific data.
       ``(e) Use of Science in Decisionmaking.--In carrying out 
     this section, the President shall use--
       ``(1) the best available peer-reviewed science and 
     supporting studies conducted in accordance with sound and 
     objective scientific practices; and
       ``(2) data collected by accepted methods or best available 
     methods (if the reliability of the method and the nature of 
     the decision justifies use of the data).
       ``(f) Regulations.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the President shall issue a 
     final regulation implementing this section.''.

     SEC. 403. NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES.

       Section 107(f)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, (42 U.S.C. 
     9607(f)(1)), is amended by striking the fifth sentence 
     (beginning ``The measure of damages'') and inserting the 
     following: ``The measure of damages in any action under 
     subsection (a)(4)(C) may include only the reasonable costs 
     of: (i) restoring, replacing or acquiring the equivalent 
     (referred to collectively as ``restoration") of an injured, 
     destroyed or lost natural resource to reinstate the human 
     uses and environmental functions of the natural resource; 
     (ii) providing a substantially equivalent resource during the 
     period of any interim lost use of the injured, destroyed or 
     lost resource to the extent that a substitute resource 
     providing the uses is not otherwise reasonably available; and 
     (iii) assessing the damages. Where a unique resource has been 
     destroyed, lost, or cannot be restored, the measure of 
     damages may include the reasonable costs of expediting or 
     enhancing the restoration of appropriate substitute 
     resources. For purposes of this paragraph, reasonable costs 
     of alternative restoration measures shall be determined based 
     on the following factors: technical feasibility; cost 
     effectiveness; the period of time required for restoration; 
     and whether a response action or natural recovery will 
     reinstate the uses provided by a natural resource within a 
     reasonable period of time.''.

     SEC. 404. DOUBLE RECOVERY.

       Section 107(f)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9607(f)(1))) is amended by striking the sixth sentence 
     (beginning ``There shall be no'') and inserting the 
     following: ``A person shall not be liable for damages under 
     this paragraph for an injury to, destruction of, or loss of a 
     natural resource, or a loss of the uses provided by the 
     natural resource, that have been recovered under this Act or 
     any other Federal, State or Tribal law for the same injury 
     to, destruction of, or loss of the natural resource or loss 
     of the uses provided by the natural resource.''.
                            TITLE V--FUNDING

     SEC. 501. USES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUPERFUND.

       The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 is amended by striking sections 111 and 
     112 (9611, 9612) and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 111. USES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUPERFUND.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Specific uses.--The President shall use amounts 
     appropriated out of the Hazardous Substance Superfund only--
       ``(A) for the performance of response actions;
       ``(B) to enter into mixed funding agreements in accordance 
     with section 122; and
       ``(C) to reimburse a party for response costs incurred in 
     excess of the allocated share of the party as described in a 
     final settlement under section 122.
       ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated from the Hazardous Substances 
     Superfund for the purposes specified in paragraph (1), not 
     more than the following amounts:
       ``(A) For fiscal year 2000, $1,165,000,000, of which not 
     more than $200,000,000 shall be used for the purposes set 
     forth in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1).
       ``(B) For fiscal year 2001, $1,165,000,000, of which not 
     more than $200,000,000 shall be used for the purposes set 
     forth in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1).
       ``(C) For fiscal year 2002, $1,120,000,000, of which not 
     more than $200,000,000 shall be used for the purposes set 
     forth in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1).
       ``(D) For fiscal year 2003, $1,075,000,000, of which not 
     more than $200,000,000 shall be used for the purposes set 
     forth in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1). and
       ``(E) For fiscal year 2004, $1,025,000,000, of which not 
     more than $200,000,000 shall be used for the purposes set 
     forth in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1).

[[Page 19946]]

       ``(b) Claims Against Hazardous Substance Superfund.--Claims 
     against the Hazardous Substance Superfund shall not be valid 
     or paid in excess of the total amount in the Hazardous 
     Substance Superfund at any 1 time.
       ``(c) Regulations.--
       ``(1) Obligation of funds.--The President may promulgate 
     regulations designating 1 or more Federal officials that may 
     obligate amounts in the Hazardous Substance Superfund in 
     accordance with this section.
       ``(2) Notice to potential injured parties.--
       ``(A) In general.--The President shall promulgate 
     regulations with respect to the notice that shall be provided 
     to potential injured parties by an owner and operator of any 
     vessel or facility from which a hazardous substance has been 
     released.
       ``(B) Substance.--The regulations under subparagraph (A) 
     shall describe the notice that would be appropriate to carry 
     out this title.
       ``(C) Compliance.--
       ``(i) In general.--On promulgation of regulations under 
     subparagraph (A), an owner and operator described in that 
     subparagraph shall provide notice in accordance with the 
     regulations.
       ``(ii) Pre-promulgation releases.--In the case of a release 
     of a hazardous substance that occurs before regulations under 
     subparagraph (A) are promulgated, an owner and operator 
     described in that subparagraph shall provide reasonable 
     notice of any release to potential injured parties by 
     publication in local newspapers serving the affected area.
       ``(iii) Releases from public vessels.--The President shall 
     provide such notification as is appropriate to potential 
     injured parties with respect to releases from public vessels.
       ``(d) Natural Resources.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     funds may not be used under this Act for the restoration, 
     rehabilitation, or replacement or acquisition of the 
     equivalent of any natural resource until a plan for the use 
     of the funds for those purposes has been developed and 
     adopted, after adequate public notice and opportunity for 
     hearing and consideration of all public comment, by--
       ``(A) affected Federal agencies;
       ``(B) the Governor of each State that sustained damage to 
     natural resources that are within the borders of, belong to, 
     are managed by, or appertain to the State; and
       ``(C) the governing body of any Indian tribe that sustained 
     damage to natural resources that--
       ``(i) are within the borders of, belong to, are managed by, 
     appertain to, or are held in trust for the benefit of the 
     tribe; or
       ``(ii) belong to a member of the tribe, if those resources 
     are subject to a trust restriction on alienation.
       ``(2) Emergency action exemption.--Funds may be used under 
     this Act for the restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement 
     or acquisition of the equivalent of any natural resource only 
     in circumstances requiring action to--
       ``(A) avoid an irreversible loss of a natural resource;
       ``(B) prevent or reduce any continuing danger to a natural 
     resource; or
       ``(C) prevent the loss of a natural resource in an 
     emergency situation similar to those described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       ``(e) Post-Closure Liability Fund.--The President shall use 
     the amounts in the Post-closure Liability Fund for--
       ``(1) any of the purposes specified in subsection (a) with 
     respect to a hazardous waste disposal facility for which 
     liability has been transferred to the Post-closure Liability 
     Fund under section 107(k); and
       ``(2) payment of any claim or appropriate request for costs 
     of a response, damages, or other compensation for injury or 
     loss resulting from a release of a hazardous substance from a 
     facility described in paragraph (1) under--
       ``(A) section 107; or
       ``(B) any other Federal or State law.
       ``(f) Inspector General.--
       ``(1) Audit.--In each fiscal year, the Inspector General of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency shall conduct an annual 
     audit of--
       ``(A) all agreements and reimbursements under subsection 
     (a); and
       ``(B) all other activities of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency under this Act.
       ``(2) Report.--The Inspector General of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall submit to Congress an annual report 
     that--
       ``(A) describes the results of the audit under paragraph 
     (1); and
       ``(B) contains such recommendations as the Inspector 
     General considers to be appropriate.
       ``(g) Foreign Claims.--To the extent that this Act permits, 
     a foreign claimant may assert a claim to the same extent that 
     a United States claimant may assert a claim if--
       ``(1) the release of a hazardous substance occurred--
       ``(A) in the navigable waters of a foreign country of which 
     the claimant is a resident; or
       ``(B) in or on the territorial sea or adjacent shoreline of 
     a foreign country described in subparagraph (A);
       ``(2) the claimant is not otherwise compensated for the 
     loss of the claimant;
       ``(3) the hazardous substance was released from a facility 
     or vessel located adjacent to or within the navigable waters 
     under the jurisdiction of, or was discharged in connection 
     with activities conducted under--
       ``(A) section 20(a)(2) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 
     Act (43 U.S.C. 1346(a)(2)); or
       ``(B) the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1501 et 
     seq.); and
       ``(4)(A) recovery is authorized by a treaty or an executive 
     agreement between the United States and the foreign country; 
     or
       ``(B) the Secretary of State, in consultation with the 
     Attorney General and other appropriate officials, certifies 
     that the foreign country provides a comparable remedy for 
     United States claimants.
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations Out of the General 
     Fund.--
       ``(1) Health assessments and health consultations.--There 
     are authorized to be appropriated to the Agency for Toxic 
     Substances and Disease Registry to conduct health assessments 
     and health consultations under this Act, and for 
     epidemiologic and laboratory studies, preparation of 
     toxicologic profiles, development and maintenance of a 
     registry of persons exposed to hazardous substances to allow 
     long-term health effects studies, and diagnostic services not 
     otherwise available to determine whether persons in 
     populations exposed to hazardous substances in connection 
     with a release or suspected release are suffering from long-
     latency diseases:
       ``(A) For fiscal year 2000, $60,000,000.
       ``(B) For fiscal year 2001, $55,000,000.
       ``(C) For fiscal year 2002, $55,000,000.
       ``(D) For fiscal year 2003, $50,000,000.
       ``(E) For fiscal year 2004, $50,000,000.
       ``(2) Hazardous substance research, demonstration, and 
     training.--
       ``(A) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     not more than the following amounts for the purposes of 
     section 311(a):
       ``(i) For fiscal year 2000, $40,000,000.
       ``(ii) For fiscal year 2001, $40,000,000.
       ``(iii) For fiscal year 2002, $40,000,000.
       ``(iv) For each of fiscal years 2003 and 2004, $40,000,000.
       ``(B) Training limitation.--Not more than 15 percent of the 
     amounts appropriated under subparagraph (A) shall be used for 
     training under section 311(a) for any fiscal year.
       ``(C) University hazardous substance research centers.--Not 
     more than $5,000,000 of the amounts available in the 
     Hazardous Substance Superfund may be used in any of fiscal 
     years 2000 through 2004 for the purposes of section 311(d).
       ``(3) Brownfield grant programs.--There are authorized to 
     be appropriated to carry out section 127 $100,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2000 through 2004.
       ``(4) Qualifying state response programs.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to maintain, establish, and 
     administer qualifying State response programs during the 
     first 5 full fiscal years following the date of enactment of 
     this paragraph under a formula established by the 
     Administrator, $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 
     through 2004.
       ``(5) Department of justice.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Attorney General, for enforcement of this 
     Act, $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 through 2004.
       ``(6) Prohibition of transfer.--None of the funds 
     authorized to be appropriated under this subsection may be 
     transferred to any other Federal agency.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Response actions.--Section 104(c) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9604(c)) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``obligations from the 
     Fund, other than those authorized by subsection (b) of this 
     section,'' and inserting ``, such response actions''; and
       (B) in paragraph (7), by striking ``shall be from funds 
     received by the Fund from amounts recovered on behalf of such 
     fund under this Act'' and inserting ``shall be from 
     appropriations out of the general fund of the Treasury''.
       (2) Information gathering and analysis.--Section 105(g)(4) 
     of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9605(g)(4)) is amended by 
     striking ``expenditure of monies from the Fund for''.
       (3) President.--Section 107(c)(3) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607(c)(3)) is amended in the first sentence 
     by striking ``Fund'' and inserting ``President''.
       (4) Other liability.--Section 109(d) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 9609(d)) is amended by striking the second 
     sentence.
       (5) Source of funding.--Section 119(c)(3) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9619(c)(3)) is amended--
       (A) in the second sentence, by striking ``For purposes of 
     section 111, amounts'' and inserting ``Amounts''; and
       (B) in the third sentence--

[[Page 19947]]

       (i) by striking ``If sufficient funds are unavailable in 
     the Hazardous Substance Superfund established under 
     subchapter A of chapter 98 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1954 to make payments pursuant to such indemnification or if 
     the Fund is repealed, there'' and inserting ``There``; and
       (ii) by striking ``payments'' and inserting 
     ``expenditures''.
       (6) Remedial action using hazardous substance superfund.--
     Section 121(d)(4)(F) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9621(d)(4)(F)) is amended--
       (A) by striking `` using the Fund''; and
       (B) by striking ``amounts from the Fund'' and inserting 
     ``funds''.
       (7) Availability of funding.--Section 122(f)(4)(F) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9622(f)(4)(F)) is amended by 
     striking ``the Fund or other sources of''.

  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, I am pleased to join the 
distinguished chairman of the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
in introducing the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1999 
(SARA). This bill is the result of several months of negotiations in 
the Committee, and reflects input we received from Senators on both 
sides of the aisle, state and local officials, the Administration, 
environmental groups, and the regulated community.
  My colleagues who are familiar with our original bill, S. 1090, will 
notice several changes made in this new legislation.
  Perhaps most significantly, we have added new titles on remedy 
selection and natural resource damages. These new provisions are 
similar to those contained in S. 8, the Superfund Cleanup Acceleration 
Act in the 105th Congress. Some may remember that the Environment and 
Public Works Committee reported S. 8 in May of 1998, but we never were 
able to debate the bill on the Senate floor.
  Our remedy selection provisions are fairly straightforward. We would 
codify EPA's policy on the preference for treatment of principal 
threats, with an exception for sites, such as mining sites, at which 
such a preference would be inappropriate. We require remedies to 
achieve a degree of cleanup that complies with applicable Federal and 
State standards. We also set forth requirements for site specific risk 
assessments.
  On natural resource damages (NRD), we deal with the major issues that 
have been debated over the last 10 years or more. SARA's NRD 
provisions:
  Provide a clear definition of the objective of restoration; require 
costs assessed against responsible parties to be reasonable, based on 
the restoration measure's technical feasibility, cost effectiveness, 
timeliness, and consideration of natural recovery as a restoration 
alternative; prohibit recoveries for so-called ``nonuser'' damages and 
appropriately limit lost use damages; provide for the expedited or 
enhanced restoration of substitute resources where a unique resource 
that cannot be replaced has been destroyed, lost or damaged; provide 
responsible parties with the right to de novo review--or a full trial 
on all aspects of the claims against them; and, preclude double 
recovery against responsible parties.
  In addition to these new titles, we have also made several changes to 
S. 1090 as introduced.
  First, we have increased authorized funding levels in the first two 
years of the five-year period covered by the bill and made the ramp-
down in funding less severe in the final three years.
  Second, we deleted the cap on new NPL listings and revised the 
requirement for removing clean contiguous property parcels from NPL 
listings.
  Third, we made extensive changes to the allocation system to provide 
additional flexibility. We added authorization for early settlements 
without an allocation, as well as an expedited allocation based only on 
an estimate of the orphan share.
  Fourth, we expressly preserve strict, joint and several liability for 
those parties who choose not to participate in a settlement. We also 
ensure that EPA's existing authority to issue orders and engage in 
removal actions is not unduly limited.
  Mr. President, these modifications have, in my view, improved the 
bill substantially. We are introducing this new bill for the 
information of our colleagues, and in an effort to generate more 
support for this legislation.
  Unfortunately, these revisions to our Superfund bill were not 
sufficient to garner support from a majority of the Members on the 
Committee. That is disappointing to me, and I would urge my colleagues 
to take a good look at the bill we introduce today. It represents 
strong reform of the troubled Superfund program. It will accelerate 
cleanup by injecting greater fairness into the system, providing more 
resources for state and local cleanup efforts, and providing finality 
for decisions made under those state programs.
  Our legislation continues to make major reforms in six areas. 
Specifically, SARA:
  Directs EPA to finish the job that was started nearly two decades ago 
by completing the evaluation of the 3,000 remaining sites on the CERLA 
Information System (CERCLIS).
  Clearly allocates responsibility between states and EPA for future 
cleanups.
  Protects municipalities, small businesses, recyclers, and other 
parties from unfair liability--while making the system fairer for 
everyone else.
  Provides states $100 million per year and full authority for their 
own cleanup programs.
  Revitalizes communities with $100 million in annual brownfields 
redevelopment grants.
  Requires fiscal responsibility by EPA and saves taxpayers money.
  Our legislation will result in more hazardous waste sites being 
cleaned up--and in fewer dollars being wasted on litigation. It will 
give much-needed and much-deserved liability relief to innocent 
landowners, contiguous property owners, prospective purchasers, 
municipalities, small businesses, and recyclers. Unlike EPA's 
administrative reforms, this bill does not shift costs from politically 
popular parties to those left holding the bag. Instead, it requires 
payment of a statutory orphan share and authorizes the use of the 
Superfund Trust Fund for those shares.
  For those left trapped in the Superfund liability scheme, SARA 
requires an allocation process to determine a party's fair share in an 
expedited settlement--instead of fighting it out for years in court.
  In addition to increasing fairness, SARA provides much needed 
guidance and direction to a sometimes wayward EPA. It recognizes and 
builds upon the growth and strength of State hazardous waste cleanup 
programs. It provides new resources to States and localities for their 
cleanup and redevelopment efforts. As many of my colleagues know, the 
fear of Superfund liability has resulted in an estimated 450,000 
abandoned or underutilized properties, or ``Brownfields,'' that lay 
fallow because private developers and municipalities don't want to be 
dragged into Superfund's litigation quagmire. With new resources and 
appropriate liability protections, our bill will allow the cleanup of 
those sites, spurring economic redevelopment in cities, towns, and 
rural areas across America.
  We take a different approach to the brownfields redevelopment issue 
than the Administration seeks. Along with many of my colleagues, I 
believe that economic redevelopment is primarily a State and local 
issue. Our approach provides the resources and freedom States need to 
make progress on this front, rather than giving EPA new authority to 
get into the commercial real estate and redevelopment business. That is 
not EPA's role, nor should it be.
  Where EPA does have a role is in identifying and addressing risks at 
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Our legislation ensures that EPA 
regains its focus on that mission.
  Earlier this year, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reported that 
``completion of construction at existing sites'' and reducing new 
entries into the program was the Environmental Protection Agency's top 
Superfund priority. Unfortunately, EPA's narrow focus on generating 
construction completion statistics appear to have divested resources 
from EPA's fundamental mission--protecting human health and the 
environment from releases of hazardous waste.

[[Page 19948]]

  GAO reported last year that 3,000 sites still await a National 
Priorities List decision by EPA. Most of those sites have been in the 
CERCLIS inventory for more than a decade. According to the report, 
however, more than 1,200 of them are actually ineligible for listing on 
the NPL, for a variety of reasons. Some of the sites were classified 
erroneously, while others either do not require cleanup, have already 
been cleaned up, or have final cleanup underway. EPA's failure to 
remove the specter of an NPL listing at these sites has likely caused 
significant economic and social harm to the surrounding communities. 
EPA needs to focus on that task.
  In addition, far too many of the sites that are still potentially 
eligible for listing have received little or no attention from EPA. EPA 
admitted taking no cleanup action at all at 336 sites and provided no 
information for another 48 sites. The only action taken at 719 sites 
was an initial site assessment. EPA's inattention may be due to the 
fact that EPA and state officials together identified only 232 of the 
sites as worthy of being added to NPL. In that case, however, the 
appropriate response is to archive the sites while ensuring that any 
necessary cleanup occurs under some other Federal or State program. EPA 
needs to focus on that task as well.
  Unfortunately, there is also disagreement between EPA and state 
officials about even those 232 sites. EPA identified 132 that may be 
listed on the NPL in the future, but state officials agreed on only 26 
of those. Conversely, state officials identified a different group of 
100 sites as worthy of an NPL listing in the future.
  EPA agreed with GAO's recommendation that it ``develop a joint 
strategy'' with the States for addressing these sites. After nearly 20 
years and $20 billion in taxpayer funded EPA appropriations, it is 
disturbing that the agency only now is developing such strategy. 
Nonetheless, Congress has an obligation to provide direction and 
assistance to EPA in this effort. The Superfund Amendments and 
Reauthorization Act provides that direction by:
  Requiring EPA to finish evaluating and/or archiving old sites stuck 
in the CERCLIS inventory, thus correcting the current imbalance between 
evaluating uncontrolled sites and amassing construction completed 
statistics.
  Providing EPA with a schedule of 30 NPL listings per year, to ensure 
that it and the States appropriately allocate sites for cleanup under 
Superfund, RCRA, or State response programs.
  Increasing current law limits on EPA removal actions to provide 
greater flexibility in responding to sites that, at least initially, 
should be the responsibility of the Federal government, but ultimately 
do not require an NPL listing.
  These provisions will ensure that the limited universe of sites 
remaining in the Superfund pipeline are dealt with quickly and safely.
  In addition to keeping EPA focused on the task at hand, our bill 
provides increased resources and authority to the States, in 
recognition of the progress made by State cleanup programs in the last 
decade.
  Superfund is notable among the major Federal environmental statutes 
not only for its abysmal track record, but also for its heavy reliance 
on EPA action rather that state implementation. In other environmental 
programs--RCRA, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act--EPA 
typically sets general program direction and provides technical support 
while leaving implementation and enforcement to the states. In the 
Superfund program, however, EPA takes a direct role in both enforcement 
and cleanup. This leadership role was originally justified by a 
perceived inability or alleged unwillingness on the part of states to 
perform or oversee cleanups. The situation today is far different.
  The Environmental Law Institute reported last year that States have 
now completed 41,000 cleanups, with another 13,700 in progress. The 
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials 
(ASTSWMO) reports that ``States are not only addressing more sites at 
any given time, but are also completing more sites through streamlined 
State programs. State programs have matured and increased in their 
infrastructure capacity.''
  Most now recognize that states have made great strides in their 
programs, and even EPA in May of 1998 released a ``Plan to Enhance the 
Role of States and Tribes in the Superfund Program.'' Not surprisingly, 
while that plan appears to provide some increased opportunities for 
state leadership, it also envisions a significant, on-going role for 
EPA.
  The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, on the other hand, 
assists, recognizes, and builds on the growth of state cleanup 
programs. SARA also responds to pleas from ASTSWMO, the National 
Governors Association, and others to remove the ever-present threat of 
EPA over-filing and third party lawsuits under Superfund when a site is 
being cleaned up under a State program. SARA recognizes the fact that 
States should be the leaders in cleaning up hazardous waste sites by:
  Providing $100 million annually for State core and voluntary response 
programs to allow States to build on their impressive record of 
accomplishment in this area.
  Providing finality, except in cases of emergency or at a State's 
request, for cleanups conducted under State law.
  Requiring EPA to work with the States so that sites listed on the NPL 
are those the Governor of the State agrees warrant an NPL listing.
  Mr. President, the legislation we introduce today has the strong 
support of the nation's small businesses, Governors, Mayors, and state 
cleanup officials. I urge my colleagues to support it as well.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. 
        Feingold, and Mr. Moynihan):
  S. 1538. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify 
State and local authority to regulate the placement, construction,and 
modification of broadcast transmission and telecommunications 
facilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.


                 telecommunications towers legislation

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it is going on two years since I first 
submitted comments to the Federal Communications Commission regarding 
their proposed rules to preempt State and local governments in the 
placement and construction of telecommunications towers. Close to two 
years later, I am still working to ensure that the voice of States and 
local governments are heard in the continuing fight over 
telecommunications tower construction.
  I am proud to be joined by Senators Jeffords, Hutchison, Feingold, 
and Moynihan in introducing legislation which will mandate that states 
and towns cannot be ignored in the spread of telecommunications towers. 
This bill recognizes that states and towns do have choices in this 
cellular age.
  I became greatly alarmed two years ago, when the Federal 
Communications Commission proposed rules which would preempt State and 
local governments in the siting of telecommunications towers. This rule 
is still pending, and it has been by no means the only or final 
attempts to minimize the role of State and local governments in the 
clamor to erect telecommunications towers.
  For instance, some may recall the ```E-911'' bill that was introduced 
last Congress which would have prohibited State and local governments 
from having any say over the placement or construction of 
telecommunications towers on federal lands. Keep in mind that federal 
courthouses and post offices are included in this category.
  I continue to be very concerned that the rights of citizens are being 
jeopardized by the interests of telecommunications companies.
  As I have said before, I do not want Vermont turned into a 
pincushion, with 200 foot towers indiscriminately sprouting up on every 
mountain and in every valley.
  The state of Vermont must have a role in deciding where 
telecommunications towers are going to go. Vermont citizens and 
communities

[[Page 19949]]

should be able to participate in the important decisions affecting 
their families and their future.
  Twenty-nine years ago, Vermont enacted landmark legislation, known as 
Act 250, to carefully establish procedures to balance the interests of 
development with the interests of the environment, health and safety, 
resource conservation and the protection of Vermont's natural beauty. I 
do not want Act 250's legacy to be undermined by the interests of 
telecommunications companies.
  Another factor that should remain at the forefront of this debate is 
the existence of alternative communication technologies.
  For instance, some companies are working to offer phone service 
throughout the United States that is based on low-earth-orbit 
satellites. Over time, this will provide a satellite communications 
link from any place in the world, even where no tower-based system is 
available. Emergency communications--911 and disaster assistance--will 
be greatly aided with this development.
  In addition, I have previously discussed how the towerless PCS-Over-
Cable and PCS-Over-Fiber technology provides digital cellular phone 
service by using small antennas rather than large towers. These small 
antennas can be quickly attached to existing telephone poles, lamp 
posts or buildings and can provide quality wireless phone service 
without the use of towers. This technology is cheaper than most tower 
technology in part because the PCS-Over-Cable wireless provider does 
not have to purchase land to erect large towers.
  Since there are viable and reasonable alternatives to providing 
wireless phone service through the use of towers, I think that towns 
should have some say in this matter. And I think that mayors, town 
officials and local citizens will agree with me.
  Also, consider this: the Federal Aviation Administration presently 
has limited authority to regulated the siting of towers, and because of 
this, airport officials work with local governments in the siting of 
towers. Silencing local governments will have a direct effect on 
airline safety, according to the representatives of the airline 
industry that we have heard from.
  In fact, in a comment letter responding to the FCC's 1997 proposed 
rule at preemption, the National Association of State Aviation 
Officials stated that preemption ``is contrary to the most fundamental 
principles of aviation safety * * * the proposed rule could result in 
the creation of hazards to aircraft and passengers at airports across 
the United States, as well as jeopardize safety on the ground.'' I 
cannot think of anyone who would want towers constructed irrespective 
of the negative and potentially dangerous impacts they may have on 
airplane flight and landing patterns.
  There is also a growing concern about potential health hazards 
associated with using cellular telephones. Though there was a major 
push by the U.S. federal government to research effects of electric and 
magnetic fields on biological systems, as is evidenced by the five-year 
Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information 
Dissemination Program, there has been no similar effort to research 
potential health effects of radio frequency emissions associated with 
wireless communications and wireless broadcast facilities. This 
omission should no longer be overlooked.
  As I have said before, I am for progress, but not for ill-considered, 
so-called progress at the expense of Vermont families, towns and 
homeowners. Vermont can protect its rural and natural beauty while 
still providing for the amazing opportunities offered by these 
technological advances.
  I am proud to continue in my commitment to the preservation of State 
and local authority over the siting and construction of 
telecommunications towers. I ask unanimous consent that this 
legislation be printed the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1538

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

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The placement of Telecommunications Facilities near 
     residential properties can greatly reduce the value of such 
     properties, destroy the views from such properties, and 
     reduce substantially the desire to live in the area.
       (2) States and local governments should be able to exercise 
     control over the placement, construction, and modification of 
     such facilities through the use of zoning, planned growth, 
     and other land use regulations relating to the protection of 
     the environment and public health, safety and welfare of the 
     community.
       (3) There are alternatives to the construction of 
     facilities to meet telecommunications and broadcast needs, 
     including, but not limited to, alternative locations, 
     colocation of antennas on existing towers or structures, 
     towerless PCS-Over-Cable or PCS-Over-Fiber telephone service, 
     satellite television systems, low-Earth orbit satellite 
     communication networks, and other alternative technologies.
       (4) There are alternative methods of designing towers to 
     meet telecommunications and broadcast needs, including the 
     use of small towers that do not require blinking aircraft 
     safety lights, break skylines, or protrude above tree 
     canopies and that are camouflaged or disguised to blend with 
     their surroundings, or both.
       (5) On August 19, 1997, the Federal Communications 
     Commission issued a proposed rule, MM Docket No. 97-182, 
     which would preempt the application of State and local zoning 
     and land use ordinances regarding the placement, construction 
     and modification of broadcast transmission facilities. It is 
     in the interest of the Nation that the Commission not adopt 
     this rule.
       (6) It is in the interest of the Nation that the memoranda 
     opinions and orders and proposed rules of the Commission with 
     respect to application of certain ordinances to the placement 
     of such towers (WT Docket No. 97-192, ET Docket No. 93-62, 
     RM-8577, and FCC 97-303, 62 F.R. 47960) be modified in order 
     to permit State and local governments to exercise their 
     zoning and land use authorities, and their power to protect 
     public health and safety, to regulate the placement of 
     telecommunications or broadcast facilities and to place the 
     burden of proof in civil actions, and in actions before the 
     Commission and State and local authorities relating to the 
     placement, construction, and modification of such facilities, 
     on the person or entity that seeks to place, construct, or 
     modify such facilities.
       (7) PCS-Over-Cable, PCS-Over-Fiber, and satellite 
     telecommunications systems, including low-Earth orbit 
     satellites, offer a significant opportunity to provide so-
     called ``911'' emergency telephone service throughout much of 
     the United States.
       (8) According to the Comptroller General, the Commission 
     does not consider itself a health agency and turns to health 
     and radiation experts outside the Commission for guidance on 
     the issue of health and safety effects of radio frequency 
     exposure.
       (9) The Federal Aviation Administration does not have 
     adequate authority to regulate the placement, construction 
     and modification of telecommunications facilities near 
     airports or high-volume air traffic areas such as corridors 
     of airspace or commonly used flyways. The Commission's 
     proposed rules to preempt State and local zoning and land-use 
     regulations for the siting of such facilities will have a 
     serious negative impact on aviation safety, airport capacity 
     and investment, and the efficient use of navigable airspace.
       (10) The telecommunications industry and its experts should 
     be expected to have access to the best and most recent 
     technical information and should therefore be held to the 
     highest standards in terms of their representations, 
     assertions, and promises to governmental authorities.
       (11) There has been a substantial effort by the Federal 
     Government to determine the effects of electric and magnetic 
     fields on biological systems, as is evidenced by the Electric 
     and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information 
     Dissemination (RAPID) Program, which was established by 
     section 2118 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Public Law 
     102-486; 42 U.S.C. 13478). This five-year program, which was 
     coordinated by the National Institute of Environmental Health 
     Sciences and the Department of Energy, examined the possible 
     effects of electric and magnetic fields on human health. 
     Despite the success of this program, there has been no 
     similar effort by the Federal Government to determine the 
     possible effects on human health of radio frequency emissions 
     associated with telecommunications facilities. The RAPID 
     program could serve as the excellent model for a Federally-
     sponsored research project.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To repeal certain limitations on State and local 
     authority regarding the placement, construction, and 
     modification of personal wireless service facilities and 
     related facilities as such limitations arise under section

[[Page 19950]]

     332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
     332(c)(7)).
       (2) To permit State and local governments--
       (A) in cases where the placement, construction, or 
     modification of telecommunications facilities and other 
     facilities is inconsistent with State and local regulations, 
     laws or decisions, to require the use of alternative 
     telecommunication or broadcast technologies when such 
     alternative technologies are available;
       (B) to regulate the placement, modification and 
     construction of such facilities so that their placement, 
     construction and or modification will not interfere with the 
     safe and efficient use of public airspace or otherwise 
     compromise or endanger public safety; and
       (C) to hold applicants for permits for the placement, 
     construction, or modification of such telecommunication 
     facilities, and providers of services using such towers and 
     facilities, accountable for the truthfulness and accuracy of 
     representations and statements placed in the record of 
     hearings for such permits, licenses or approvals.

     SEC. 2. STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER PLACEMENT, 
                   CONSTRUCTION, AND MODIFICATION OF 
                   TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.

       (a) Repeal of Limitations on Regulation of Personal 
     Wireless Facilities.--Section 332(c)(7)(B) of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``thereof--'' and all that 
     follows through the end and inserting ``thereof shall not 
     unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally 
     equivalent services.'';
       (2) by striking clause (iv);
       (3) by redesignating clause (v) as clause (iv); and
       (4) in clause (iv), as so redesignated--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``30 days after such 
     action or failure to act'' and inserting ``30 days after 
     exhaustion of any administrative remedies with respect to 
     such action or failure to act''; and
       (B) by striking the third sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``In any such action in which a person seeking to 
     place, construct, or modify a telecommunications facility is 
     a party, such person shall bear the burden of proof, 
     regardless of who commences the action.''
       (b) Prohibition on Adoption of Rule Regarding Preemption of 
     State and Local Authority Over Broadcast Transmission 
     Facilities.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Federal Communications Commission may not adopt as a final 
     rule or otherwise the proposed rule set forth in ``Preemption 
     of State and Local Zoning and Land Use Restrictions on 
     Siting, Placement and Construction of Broadcast Station 
     Transmission Facilities'', MM Docket No. 97-182, released 
     August 19, 1997.
       (c) Authority Over Placement, Construction, and 
     Modification of Other Transmission Facilities.--Part I of 
     title III of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 337. STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY OVER PLACEMENT, 
                   CONSTRUCTION, AND MODIFICATION OF 
                   TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this Act, no provision of this Act may be interpreted to 
     authorize any person or entity to place, construct, or modify 
     telecommunications facilities in a manner that is 
     inconsistent with State or local law, or contrary to an 
     official decision of the appropriate State or local 
     government entity having authority to approve, permit, 
     license, modify, or deny an application to place, construct, 
     or modify a tower, if alternate technology is capable of 
     delivering the broadcast or telecommunications signals 
     without the use of a tower.
       ``(b) Authority Regarding Production of Safety and 
     Interference Studies.--No provision of this Act may be 
     interpreted to prohibit a State or local government from--
       ``(1) requiring a person or entity seeking authority to 
     place, construct or modify telecommunications facilities or 
     broadcast transmission facilities within the jurisdiction of 
     such government to produce--
       ``(A) environmental studies, engineering reports, or other 
     documentation of the compliance of such facilities with radio 
     frequency exposure limits established by the Commission and 
     compliance with applicable laws and regulations governing the 
     effects of the proposed facility or the health, safety and 
     welfare of the local residents in the community; and
       ``(B) documentation of the compliance of such facilities 
     with applicable Federal, State, and local aviation safety 
     standards or aviation obstruction standards regarding objects 
     effecting navigable airspace; or
       ``(2) refusing to grant authority to such person to locate 
     such facilities within the jurisdiction of such government if 
     such person fails to produce any studies, reports, or 
     documentation required under paragraph (1).
       ``(c) Construction.--Nothing in this section may be 
     construed to prohibit or otherwise limit the authority of a 
     State or local government to ensure compliance with or 
     otherwise enforce any statements, assertions, or 
     representations filed or submitted by or on behalf of an 
     applicant with the State or local government for authority to 
     place, construct or modify telecommunications facilities or 
     broadcast transmission facilities within the jurisdiction of 
     the State or local government.''.

     SEC. 3. ASSESSMENT OF RESEARCH ON EFFECTS OF RADIO FREQUENCY 
                   EMISSIONS ON HUMAN HEALTH.

       (a) Assessment.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     shall carry out an independent assessment on the effects of 
     radio frequency emission on human health. The Secretary shall 
     carry out the independent assessment through grants to 
     appropriate public and private entities selected by the 
     Secretary for purposes of the independent assessment.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated for the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services for fiscal year 2000, $10,000,000 for purposes 
     of grants for the independent assessment required by 
     subsection (a). Amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriation in the preceding sentence 
     shall remain available until expended.
       (c) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
     produce a report on existing research evaluating the 
     biological effects to human health of short term, high-level, 
     as well as long-term, low-level exposures to radio frequency 
     emissions to Congress no later than January 1, 2001.

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am pleased to stand together today 
with my distinguished colleague, Senator Leahy, the ranking member of 
the Judiciary Committee, on a bill that protects the rights of state 
and local governments.
  Mr. President, the bill that Senator Leahy introduced today addresses 
an egregious affront to state and local authority. Indeed, the Federal 
Communications Commission's proposed rule on telecommunications tower 
siting is an explicit transfer of power to the federal government.
  Mr. President, the FCC would have the American people believe that it 
understands state and local land use issues better than the folks back 
home. It's proposed rule, itself promoted by a special interest group, 
would preempt state and local zoning and land use restrictions on the 
siting and construction of telecommunications towers. This is not the 
way the Federal government should be operating.
  The FCC's proposed rule would set specific time limits within state 
and local governments must act in response to requests for approval of 
the placement, construction or modification of these towers. In 
addition, the rule would ``remove from local consideration certain 
types of restrictions on the siting and construction of transmission 
facilities.'' And finally, the rule would preempt all state and local 
laws that impair the ability of licensed broadcasters to construct or 
modify towers unless the state or local government can prove that their 
regulation is ``reasonable in relation to a clearly defined and 
expressly stated health or safety objective.
  Mr. President, the proposal infringes on the rights of states and 
localities to make important zoning decisions in accordance with their 
own development objectives. It infringes also on the rights of 
residents of states and localities to fully enjoy the protection of 
rules requiring notification of adjacent land owners, hearing 
requirements and appeal periods. Under the proposed rule, the Federal 
government would impose specific time periods during which zoning 
disputes between entities seeking to build or modify towers and the 
state or locality must be resolved.
  The rule also appears to preempt entirely a local or state law 
regarding tower placement even if that law is intended to ensure the 
health or safety of the community. The rule would allow health and 
safety concerns to be overridden by the federal interest in the 
construction of transmission facilities and in the promotion of fair 
and effective competition among electronic media. It is unclear why the 
business operations of telecommunications companies should override 
local health and safety concerns.
  State or local zoning or land use laws designed to address historic 
or aesthetic objectives also would be preempted under this rule.
  Mr. President, states and localities should be able to maintain the 
right to control development within their own jurisdictions without 
undue interference from the Federal government.

[[Page 19951]]

Federal preemption of zoning decisions should be the exception rather 
than the rule. The proposed rule would make federal preemption of 
legitimate local and state zoning and land use laws commonplace.
  Why would we allow this end run around state and local authority, Mr. 
President? It goes completely against the philosophy of state and local 
autonomy that so many of my colleagues support.
  To try and get to the bottom of this, Mr. President, I'd like to Call 
the Bankroll, which I do from time to time during my remarks on this 
floor. I'm going to offer some information about the political 
donations that have been made by the telecommunications giants that 
have a huge stake in the wireless communications industry. That 
industry has been lobbying hard in favor of the FCC rule, which 
empowers the federal government to overrule local communities that 
don't want a tower in their town.
  During the least election cycle, the following telecommunications 
companies with a stake in the wireless market gave millions upon 
millions of dollars to candidates and the political parties:
   Bell Atlantic gave more than $920,000 in soft money and 
nearly $885,000 in PAC money;
   Wireless manufacturer Motorola gave $100,000 in soft and 
money and nearly $110,000 in PAC money;
   The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, the 
lobbying arm of the wireless industry, gave more than $100,000 in soft 
money and more than $85,000 to candidates;
   And AT&T gave nearly $825,000 in soft money to the parties 
and nearly $820,000 in PAC money to candidates.
  Certainly, this FCC rule is not the only thing these companies are 
lobbying for, Mr. President. But whenever wealthy interests wants 
something, they have the weight of their contributions behind them. 
Those contributions influence what we do, and they deserve to be noted 
in this discussion. I think it's vitally important that we keep these 
contributions in mind as we evaluate the proposed rule, and we try to 
understand why the FCC would propose it, and why a Congress full of 
members who support state and local autonomy would stand for it.
  But Mr. President, now I'd like to get to the good news--the bill 
authored by the distinguished senior senator from Vermont, which would 
repeal limitations on state and local authority regarding the placement 
of, construction of and modifications to telecommunications towers. It 
would do so by prohibiting the FCC from adopting as final the proposed 
rule. And the bill does so in a responsible manner.
  Senator Leahy's bill incorporates aviation industry concerns by 
allowing state and local governments to require tower construction 
applications to be accompanied by documentation showing compliance with 
applicable state and local aviation standards. It acknowledges 
alternative technologies which can be used in place of towers, 
including satellite and cable. It authorizes state and local 
governments to require evidence from companies showing that the 
proposed tower would comply with federal health and environmental 
standards. And it maintains the authority of state and local 
governments to ensure that companies comply with statements, assertions 
and representations made while applying for permission to locate a 
broadcast facility.
  Mr. President, as new telecommunication towers have sprouted up by 
the thousands from coast to coast, so has the ire of our residents. To 
quote my distinguished colleague from Vermont, I too don't want 
Wisconsin turned into a giant pin cushion with 200-foot towers sticking 
out of every hill and valley.
  Mr. President, Wisconsin will be a leader in the information age, but 
Wisconsinites deserve the right to determine where towers are located 
within Wisconsin. More than a few Wisconsin communities, large and 
small, have voiced their clear opposition to the heavy hand of the 
Federal government on this issue. Various communities and groups, from 
the city of Milwaukee and the Milwaukee Regional Cable Commission to 
the cities of Fond du Lac and Brookfield to the Dodge County Board of 
Supervisors, the Lincoln County Zoning Committee, and the Oneida County 
Planning and Zoning Committee have contacted me to voice their 
opposition to the proposed rule.
  And other communities that have voiced opposition to recent tower 
siting plans, including Delafield, Fox Point, Bayside, Elm Grove, 
Germantown, Heartland, Mequon, Muskego, St. Francis, and Whitefish Bay.
  One resident of Cassian, Wisconsin, summed up the feeling of many 
Wisconsinites: ``We don't want to become a tower farm.''
  Mr. President, the FCC clearly has overstepped its regulatory bounds. 
We should empower state and local governments, not emasculate them. I 
hope my colleagues will support the rights of our states and 
municipalities, not more Federal autocracy. I commend my colleague for 
introducing this important piece of legislation.
  I yield the floor.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 1539. A bill to provide for the acquisition, construction, and 
improvement of child care facilities or equipment, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                  CHILD CARE FACILITIES FINANCING ACT

 Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator DeWine 
in introducing the Child Care Facilities Financing Act. This bill would 
help ease a significant crisis in this country--the shortage of 
adequate child care, particularly in low-income communities.
  The demand for child care is not being met by the current supply, 
especially for low-income children. Approximately 50% of children from 
families with household incomes of $10,000 or less are enrolled in 
child care or early education programs, whereas over 75% of children 
from families with household incomes over $75,000 are enrolled in such 
programs.
  According to the GAO, the child care supply shortage will worsen as 
work participation rates required under welfare reform increase over 
the next few years. The situation is particularly troublesome for 
infant and school-aged care. For example, in Chicago, the percentage of 
the demand that can be met by the known supply of child care providers 
will be only 12% for infants and 17% for school-aged children in the 
year 2002 if a greater supply is not created. The situation is even 
more dire in poor neighborhoods.
  One factor contributing to the child care shortage is the difficulty 
that would-be providers face in financing child care facility 
development. Child care providers are often viewed by financial 
institutions as risky for loans. Child care equipment and facility 
needs are unique, making for poor collateral. In low-income 
neighborhoods, child care providers face severely restricted revenues 
and low real estate values. In urban areas, would-be child care 
providers must contend with buildings in poor physical condition and 
high property costs. In all areas, reimbursement rates for child care 
subsidies are generally too low to cover the recovery cost of 
purchasing or developing facilities, especially after allowing for the 
cost of running the program. In addition, new providers often have no 
business training, and may need to learn how to manage their finances 
and business.
  The Child Care Facilities Financing Act would provide grants to 
intermediary organizations, enabling them to provide financial and 
technical assistance to existing or new child care providers --
including both center-based and home-based child care. The financial 
assistance may be in the form of loans, grants, investments, or other 
assistance, allowing for flexibility depending on the situation of the 
child care provider. The assistance may be used for acquisition, 
construction, or renovation of child care facilities or equipment. It 
may also be used for improving child care management and business 
practices. Additionally, intermediary organizations are required to 
match grant dollars with significant private sector investments, 
leveraging federal funding and creating valuable public/private 
partnerships.

[[Page 19952]]

  The added benefit in providing this kind of assistance is that it 
will spur further community and economic development. When parents can 
work with the knowledge that their children are adequately cared for, 
they become more reliable and productive workers. When the economic 
situation of families improve, distressed communities become 
revitalized.
  Let me provide you with an example from my state of how financial 
assistance for child care development has helped alleviate dire 
situations. In one low-income neighborhood in New Haven, CT, there are 
2500 children under the age of 5, but only 200 spaces in licensed child 
care facilities. For more than a decade, the LULAC Head Start program 
served this community by operating a part-day early childhood program 
in a poorly lit church basement. There has been a waiting list of over 
100 children for this program. Recently, however, this basement program 
closed, and the 54 children it served were moved to an already 
overcrowded location.
  Fortunately for LULAC, Connecticut has a new child care financing 
program. The Child Care Facilities Loan Fund Program is a public-
private partnership that provides financial assistance for child care 
facilities development, targeting school readiness programs in 
underserved areas. LULAC has finally received desperately needed 
financial assistance to develop the Hill Parent Child Center. A new 
facility is being constructed, specially adapted for child care use. 
The center will now be able to provide multicultural child care, school 
readiness, and Head Start services for 172 low-income children in New 
Haven.
  Although this story had a happy ending, many more children in New 
Haven and other places in Connecticut still need child care. And most 
states do not have a child care financing system in place.
  Working parents and their children need adequate child care. 
Increasing the supply of child care will create a better economy as 
more parents move from welfare to work, and it will create more choices 
for parents to gain control over their families' lives. I hope that you 
will join Senator DeWine and me in taking an important step toward 
lifting our nation out of its current child care crisis.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JOHNSON:
  S. 1540. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to correct 
the inadvertent failure in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 to apply to 
exception for developable sites to Round I Empowerment Zone and 
Enterprise Communities; to the Committee on Finance.


   empowerment zones and enterprise communities technical correction 
                              legislation

 Mr. JOHNSON Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation that would provide a technical correction to laws governing 
Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities (EZ/EC).
  In the second round of EZ/EC designations, language was included to 
allow for investments in `developable sites.' The developable sites 
provision provides local leaders with needed flexibility to pursue 
community and economic development initiatives that advance the goals 
of the EZ/EC program, but that may include areas adjacent to the local 
EZ/EC boundaries. Unfortunately, the existing language only applies to 
Round II EZ/ECs. My bill would expand the existing `developable site' 
criteria to Round I EZ/ECs.
  The addition of the developable site option represents a thoughtful 
improvement to administering the EZ/EC program. Thoughtful, worthy 
initiatives should not go unrealized because of restrictions imposed by 
a line on a map. The developable site option is a critical tool and it 
should be applied equally to Round I and Round II awardees. This 
legislation would not authorize new funding, but it would assist EZs 
and ECs to invest in meaningful projects located adjacently to their 
established service area.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in this effort to provide equal 
treatment for Round I EZ/ECs to pursue comprehensive investments for 
growth and prosperity which may include projects encompassing areas 
tangential to the designated EZ/EC service area.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JOHNSON:
  S. 1541. A bill to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 
of 1974 to require annual informational statements by plans with 
qualified cash or deferred arrangements, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                       401 (k) right to know act

 Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
legislation, the 401(k) Right To Know Act, to require that 401(k) plan 
providers implement procedures to disclose the administrative fees that 
they charge their customers. However, I hope the need for the 
legislation can be effectively eliminated by voluntary action on the 
part of the plan providers to disclose fees.
  I am concerned that millions of American families work and save for 
their retirement through 401(k) plans without having an opportunity to 
fully evaluate and compare the costs of such plans. National news 
publications have suggested that some plans may be charging plan 
participants up to 2.5% of assets annually to manage their accounts. 
While I believe families should be free to choose among competing plans 
and to participate in retirement savings vehicles of their choice, I am 
troubled that information about fees is not fully disclosed.
  I believe that we have an obligation to make sure that families have 
access to basic information about fees. Congress encourages people to 
participate in 401(k) retirement plans by providing considerable tax 
advantages. We should give equal care to making sure that businesses 
and families have the information necessary to protect their nest eggs 
from excessive, undisclosed fees that threaten to siphon off the 
rewards of their work and prudence.
  Recently the Department of Labor, the American Bankers Association, 
the American Council of Life Insurance, and the Investment Company 
Institute announced a plan to address these concerns and provide 
information about 401(k) fees. I applaud this responsible and important 
effort. The agreements reached should be given fair consideration and 
an opportunity to be implemented. It is my sincere hope, that these 
efforts will be supported by all 401(k) plan providers and that 
consumers will utilize and benefit from fee disclosure.
  Nonetheless, I want to go on record to articulate my lingering 
concern for the lack of disclosure currently provided and make known my 
conviction to pursue legislative action should the industry fail to 
fully implement the goals of disclosure recently agreed upon. Again, I 
want to reiterate that I believe the recent announcement is an 
important step to resolve this issue. My goal is to make sure consumers 
have accurate and timely information about fees readily available to 
them. I will be monitoring the progress closely and remain hopeful that 
legislative action will not be necessary to achieve disclosure of 
401(k) fees.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BURNS (for himself, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Lott, and Mr. 
        Hollings):
  S. 1547. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to require 
the Federal Communications Commission to preserve low-power television 
stations that provide community broadcasting, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


           The Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999

  Mr. BURNS. Madame President, I am very pleased to introduce the 
``Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999,'' along with my 
colleagues Senator Wyden, Senator Lott and Senator Hollings.
  This critical legislation was championed last year by my good friend 
and former colleague Senator Ford. The Commerce Committee unanimously 
reported this bill on October 2, 1998 but unfortunately there was not 
sufficient time to complete action on the bill.
  Low power television stations (LPTV) offer their communities 
significant services including valuable local and other specialized 
programming to unserved and underserved audiences throughout the United 
States.

[[Page 19953]]

As secondary service broadcasters, they remain vulnerable to 
displacement and encounter huge problems with capital formation but 
have significant infrastructure requirements.
  This legislation has a very simple but important purpose. It provides 
an opportunity for LPTV licensees to convert their temporary licenses 
to permanent licenses. While the opportunity is available to all 
licensees, the legislation provides that only those who do a 
significant amount of local programming in their service areas are 
eligible for the class A permanent licenses. To ensure a serious and 
high quality level of local broadcasting by all class A licensees, this 
bill also requires that all class A licensees comply with the operating 
rules for full power stations.
  I would like to emphasize that this bill takes into account the 
hearings that were held last year before the House Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications, during which the Federal Communications Commission 
noted that the previous bill was not sufficiently flexible to address 
unforeseen engineering-related problems concerning the transition to 
digital television. The current bill provides that flexibility to 
ensure that the Commission can make whatever engineering changes that 
are necessary, even channel changes, to ensure that every full power 
station in the U.S. can achieve digital television service replication 
of its analog service area.
  I thank my colleagues for their support on this vital piece of 
legislation and look forward to seeing it passed by the Senate and into 
law.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1547

       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 ``Community Broadcasters 
     Protection Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that:
       (1) Since the creation of low-power television licenses by 
     the Federal Communications Commission, a number of license 
     holders have operated their stations in a manner beneficial 
     to the public good providing broadcasting to their 
     communities that would not otherwise be available.
       (2) These low-power broadcasters have operated their 
     stations in a manner consistent with the programming 
     objectives and hours of operation of full-power broadcasters 
     providing worthwhile services to their respective communities 
     while under sever license limitations compared to their full-
     power counterparts.
       (3) License limitations, particularly the temporary nature 
     of the license, have blocked many low-power broadcasters from 
     having access to capital, and have severely hampered their 
     ability to continue to provide quality broadcasting, 
     programming, or improvements.
       (4) The passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has 
     added to the uncertainty of the future status of these 
     stations by the lack of specific provisions regarding the 
     permanency of their licenses, or their treatment during the 
     transition to high definition, digital television.
       (5) It is in the public interest to promote diversity in 
     television programming formats by encouraging low power 
     television stations that serve foreign language communities. 
     These communities should not lose their access to foreign 
     language programming as a result of the transition to digital 
     television.

     SEC. 3. PRESERVATION OF LOW-POWER COMMUNITY TELEVISION 
                   BROADCASTING.

       (a) Section 336 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
     U.S.C. 336) is amended:
       (1) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
     (g) and (h), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(f) Preservation of Low-Power Community Television 
     Broadcasting.
       ``(1) Creation of Class A Licenses. Within 120 days after 
     the date of enactment of the Community Broadcasters 
     Protection Act of 1999, the Commission shall prescribe 
     regulations to establish a class A television to be available 
     to licensees of qualifying low-power television stations. 
     Such license shall be subject to the same license terms, and 
     renewal standards as the licenses for full-power television 
     stations except as provided in this section, and each class A 
     licensee shall be accorded primary status as a television 
     broadcaster as long as the station continues to meet the 
     requirements for a qualifying low-power station in paragraph 
     (2). Within 30 days after the date of enactment of the 
     Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999, the Commission 
     shall send a notice to the licensees of all low-power 
     television licenses that describes the requirements for Class 
     A designation. Within 60 days after the date of enactment of 
     the Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999, licensees 
     intending to seek Class A designation shall submit to the 
     Commission a certification of eligibility based on the 
     qualification requirements of this Act. Absent a material 
     deficiency, the Commission shall grant certification of 
     eligibility to apply for Class A status. The Commission shall 
     act to preserve the contours of low-power television 
     licensees pending the final resolution of a Class A 
     application. Under the requirements set forth in paragraph 
     (2)(A) and (B) and paragraph (6) of this subsection, a 
     licensee may submit an application for Class A designation 
     under this paragraph only within 30 days after final 
     regulations are adopted, except as provided for in Paragraph 
     (6)(A). The Commission shall, within 30 days after receipt of 
     an application that is acceptable for filing, award such a 
     Class A television station license to any licensee of a 
     qualifying low-power television station. If, after granting 
     certification of eligibility or a Class A license, unforeseen 
     technical problems arise that require an engineering solution 
     to a station's allotted parameters or channel assignment in 
     the digital television Table of Allotments, the Commission 
     may make such modifications as are necessary to ensure 
     replication of the digital television applicant's service 
     area as provided for in section 622 of the Commission's 
     regulations (47 C.F.R. 602).
       ``(2) Qualifying low-power television stations. For 
     purposes of this subsection, a station is a qualifying low-
     power television station if:
       ``(A) during the 90 days preceding the date of enactment of 
     the Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999:
       ``(i) such station broadcast a minimum of 18 hours per day;
       ``(ii) such station broadcast an average of at least 3 
     hours per week of programming that was produced within the 
     market area served by such station, or the market area served 
     by a group of commonly controlled stations that carry common 
     local programming not otherwise available to their 
     communities; and
       ``(iii) such station was in compliance with the 
     Commission's requirements applicable to low-power television 
     stations; and
       ``(B) from and after the date of its application for a 
     Class A license, the station is in compliance with the 
     Commission's operating rules for full power television 
     stations; or
       ``(C) the Commission determines that the public interest, 
     convenience, and necessity would be served by treating the 
     station as a qualifying low-power television station for 
     purposes of this section, or for other reasons determined by 
     the Commission.
       ``(3) Common ownership. No low-power television station 
     that is authorized as of the date of enactment of the 
     Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999 shall be 
     disqualified for a class A license based on common ownership 
     with any medium of mass communication.
       ``(4) Issuance of licenses for advanced television services 
     to qualifying low-power television stations. The Commission 
     is not required to issue any additional licenses for advanced 
     television services to the licensees of the class A 
     television stations but shall accept such license 
     applications proposing facilities that will not cause 
     interference to any other broadcast facility authorized on 
     the date of filing of the Class A advanced television 
     application. Such new license or the original license of the 
     applicant shall be forfeited at the end of the digital 
     television transition. Low-power television station licensees 
     may, at the option of licensee, elect to convert to the 
     provision of advanced television services on its analog 
     channel, but shall not be required to convert to digital 
     operation until the end of the digital television transition.
       ``(5) No preemption of section 337. Nothing in this section 
     preempts section 337 of this Act.
       ``(6) Interim qualification.
       ``(A) Stations operating within certain bandwidth. The 
     Commission may not grant a Class A license to a low power 
     television station operating between 698 and 806 megahertz, 
     but the Commission shall provide to low power television 
     stations assigned to and temporarily operating in that 
     bandwidth the opportunity to meet the qualification 
     requirements for a Class A license.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1548. A bill to establish a program to help States expand the 
existing education system to include a least 1 year of early education 
preceding the year a child enters kindergarten; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


                    the early education act of 1999

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today what I 
think is a very innovative proposal to move our education system into 
the 21st century.

[[Page 19954]]

  There has been a growing body of research suggesting that a child's 
early years are critical to the development of the brain, and that 
early brain development is an important component of educational and 
intellectual achievement. Yet, in every state in this country, school 
does not officially begin until a child is 5 to 6 years old. Many 
children are missing some critical years.
  I submit that as we enter the next century, if we are going to have 
the best educational system, we must start reaching children at an 
earlier age.
  Head Start does that. Private preschool does that. But Head Start is 
only for low-income children, and there are not enough slots for all 
those children eligible to participate. And private preschools are 
often so expensive that they are out of reach for many middle-class 
working families.
  We need to start thinking outside the box. One way to do that is to 
redefine what our educational system is. If education before 
kindergarten--before the age of 5--is so critical, maybe school should 
start a year earlier.
  The legislation that I am introducing today--the Early Education 
Act--would begin the process of expanding the existing public education 
system to include at least one year of early education preceding the 
year a child enters kindergarten. My bill would set up a 10-state 
demonstration program over the next 5 years for states that want to 
move in this direction. The Federal Government would provide seed money 
of up to 50 percent of the costs for participating states to expand 
elementary school to include at least one year of early education, with 
that program open to all students in a school district that 
participates within the state.
  A few states, most notably Georgia, are already implementing 
programs. Several other states, including my state of California, are 
planning to. In fact, I want to commend our state schools 
superintendent Delaine Eastin for all of her work in this area.
  But even those states that are committed to this idea are finding 
that resources can be a significant barrier. And so what I want to do 
is to help states out. Let's see if early education--in those states 
that are interested--really does make a difference.
  We know what the evidence so far shows. Compared to children with 
similar backgrounds who have not participated in early education 
programs, children who do participate in such programs perform better 
on reading and math tests, are more likely to make normal academic 
progress throughout elementary school, show greater learning retention 
and creativity, and are more enthusiastic about school.
  If these evaluations are accurate--and that is, in part, what my bill 
is intended to find out--early education has the potential to make 
significant improvements in the education of our children.
  I am pleased to be joined in this effort by Senator Bingaman. And I 
want to recognize Representative Anna Eshoo, who is introducing the 
House version of this bill. I encourage my colleagues to join us in 
working to adapt our educational system for the 21st century.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1548

       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 ``Early Education Act of 
     1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) In 1989 the Nation's governors established a goal that 
     all children would have access to high quality early 
     education programs by the year 2000.
       (2) Research suggests that a child's early years are 
     critical to the development of the brain. Early brain 
     development is an important component of educational and 
     intellectual achievement.
       (3) The National Research Council reported that early 
     education opportunities are necessary if children are going 
     to develop the language and literacy skills necessary to 
     learn to read.
       (4) Evaluations of early education programs demonstrate 
     that compared to children with similar backgrounds who have 
     not participated in early education programs, children who 
     participate in such programs--
       (A) perform better on reading and mathematics achievement 
     tests;
       (B) are more likely to stay academically near their grade 
     level and make normal academic progress throughout elementary 
     school;
       (C) are less likely to be held back a grade or require 
     special education services in elementary school;
       (D) show greater learning retention, initiative, 
     creativity, and social competency; and
       (E) are more enthusiastic about school and are more likely 
     to have good attendance records.
       (5) Studies have estimated that for every dollar invested 
     in quality early education, about 7 dollars are saved in 
     later costs.

     SEC. 3. EARLY EDUCATION.

       Title X of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 8001 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

                       ``PART L--EARLY EDUCATION

     ``SEC. 10995. EARLY EDUCATION.

       ``(a) Definition of Early Education.--In this part the term 
     `early education' means not less than a half-day of schooling 
     each week day during the academic year preceding the academic 
     year a child enters kindergarten.
       ``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish 
     a program to develop the foundation of early literacy and 
     numerical training among young children by helping State 
     educational agencies expand the existing education system to 
     include early education for all children.
       ``(c) Program Authorized.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to award 
     grants to not less than 10 State educational agencies to 
     enable the State educational agencies to expand the existing 
     education system with programs that provide early education.
       ``(2) Matching requirement.--The amount provided to a State 
     educational agency under paragraph (1) shall not exceed 50 
     percent of the cost of the program described in the 
     application submitted pursuant to subsection (d).
       ``(3) Requirements.--Each program assisted under this 
     section--
       ``(A) shall be carried out by one or more local educational 
     agencies, as selected by the State educational agency;
       ``(B) shall be carried out--
       ``(i) in a public school building; or
       ``(ii) in another facility by, or through a contract or 
     agreement with, a local educational agency;
       ``(C) shall be available to all children served by a local 
     educational agency carrying out the program; and
       ``(D) shall only involve instructors who are licensed or 
     certified in accordance with applicable State law.
       ``(d) Application.--Each State educational agency desiring 
     a grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner and accompanied by 
     such information as the Secretary may require. Each 
     application shall--
       ``(1) include a description of--
       ``(A) the program to be assisted under this section; and
       ``(B) how the program will meet the purpose of this 
     section; and
       ``(2) contain a statement of the total cost of the program 
     and the source of the matching funds for the program.
       ``(e) Secretarial Authority.--In order to carry out the 
     purpose of this section, the Secretary--
       ``(1) shall establish a system for the monitoring and 
     evaluation of, and shall annually report to Congress 
     regarding, the programs funded under this section; and
       ``(2) may establish any other policies, procedures, or 
     requirements, with respect to the programs.
       ``(f) Supplement Not Supplant.--Funds made available under 
     this section shall be used to supplement, not supplant, other 
     Federal, State, or local funds, including funds provided 
     under Federal programs such as Head Start and the Even Start 
     Family Literacy Program under part B of title I.
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
     $300,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2000 through 
     2004.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself Mr. Hollings, and Mr. Dorgan):
  S. 1549. A bill to inform and empower consumers in the United States 
through a voluntary labeling system for wearing apparel or sporting 
goods made without abusive and exploitative child labor, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


           Child Labor Free Consumer Information Act of 1999

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that 
will inform and empower consumers in the United States through a 
voluntary labeling system for wearing apparel and

[[Page 19955]]

sporting goods made without the use of abusive and exploitative child 
labor. I am joined in my efforts by Senators Hollings and Dorgan. I 
want to thank them for working with me on this important effort.
  This is the third time I have come to the floor of the Senate to 
introduce this bill, and I will continue to introduce it until it 
becomes law.
  I'd like to ask my colleagues to take a moment to look around. Maybe 
it's the shirt you have on right now. Or the silk tie or blouse. Or the 
tennis shoes you wear on weekends.
  Chances are that you have purchased something--perhaps many things--
made with abusive and exploitative child labor. And chances are you 
were completely unaware that was the case. You will find a label that 
tells you what size it is, how to care for it and what it costs. But it 
doesn't tell you about the person who made it.
  Mr. President, recently, the International Labor Organization (ILO) 
released a very grim report about the number of children who toil away 
in abhorrent conditions. The ILO estimates that over two hundred and 
fifty million children worldwide under the age of 15 are working 
instead of receiving a basic education. Many of these children begin 
working in factories at the age of 6 or 7, some even younger. They are 
poor, malnourished, and often forced to work 60-hour weeks for little 
or no pay.
  Now when I speak about child labor, I am not talking about 17 year-
olds helping out on the family farm or running errands after school. I 
am speaking about children, often under 12 years old, who are forced to 
work long hours in hazardous and dangerous conditions many as slaves 
instead of going to school.
  On September 23, 1993, the Senate appropriately put itself on record 
as expressing its principled opposition to the abhorrent practice of 
exploiting children for commercial gain and asserting that it should be 
the policy of the United States to prohibit the importation of products 
made through the use of abusive and exploitative child labor by passing 
a Sense of the Senate Resolution I introduced. In my view, this was the 
first step toward ending child labor.
  Americans in Des Moines or Dallas or Detroit may say, ``What does 
this have to do with us?'' It is quite simple. By protecting the rights 
of workers everywhere, we will be protecting jobs and opportunities 
here at home. A U.S. worker cannot compete with a 12 year old working 
12 hours a day for 12 cents.
  In 1998, the United States imported almost 50 percent of the wearing 
apparel sold in this country and the garment industry netted $34 
billion. According to the Department of Commerce, last year, the United 
States imported 494.1 million pairs of athletic footwear and produced 
only 65.3 million here at home.
  As I have traveled around the country and spoken with people about 
the issue of abusive and exploitative child labor, I have found that 
consumers--ordinary Americans--want to get involved. They want 
information. They want to know if the products they are buying are made 
by children.
  According to a survey sponsored by Marymount University, more than 
three out of four Americans said they would avoid shopping at stores if 
they were aware that the good sold there were made by exploitative and 
abusive child labor. They also said that they would be willing to pay 
an extra $1 on a $20 garment if it were guaranteed to be made under 
legitimate circumstances.
  Mr. President it is obvious that consumers don't want to reward 
companies with their hard earned dollars by buying products made with 
abusive and exploitative child labor.
  This issue demands our attention. Our legislation, the Child Labor 
Free Consumer Information Act 1999, will inform and empower consumers 
in the United States through a voluntary labeling system for wearing 
apparel and sporting goods made without abusive and exploitative child 
labor. In my view, a system of voluntary labeling holds the best 
promise of giving consumers the information they want--and giving the 
companies that manufacture these products the recognition they deserve.
  The crux of this legislation is to provide the framework for members 
of the wearing apparel and sporting goods industry, labor 
organizations, consumer advocacy and human rights groups along with the 
Secretaries of Commerce, Treasury and Labor to establish the labeling 
standard and develop a system to assure compliance that items were not 
made with abusive and exploitative child labor. Thus, ensuring 
consumers that the garment or pair of tennis shoes they purchase was 
made without abusive and exploitative child labor.
  In my view, Congress can't do it alone through legislation. The 
Department of Labor can't do it alone through enforcement. It takes all 
of us from the private sector to labor and human rights groups to take 
responsibility, to come together to end abusive and exploitative child 
labor. And I am pleased to say there has recently been promising action 
to that end.
  Mr. President, when the private sector decides to take speak up--it 
certainly can make a difference. In Bangladesh, the Bangladesh Garment 
Manufacturers and Exporters Association has agreed to work with the 
International Labor Organization to take children out of the garment 
factories and put them into school--where they belong. As of May 1999, 
more than 353 schools for former child workers have opened, serving 
nearly 10,000 children. So, if we can do it in Bangladesh, then we can 
do it elsewhere.
  Mr. President, let me be clear, companies can choose to use the label 
or not to. This bill is not about big government telling the private 
sector what to do. This bill is centered around this fundamental 
principle: Let the Buyer Be Aware. This ``Truth in Labeling'' 
initiative is based on the principle that a fully informed American 
consumer will make the right, and moral, choice and vote against 
abusive and exploitative child labor with their pocketbook.
  We have seen such an approach work effectively with the Rugmark label 
for hand-knotted carpets from India. It is operating in some European 
countries. Consumers who want to buy child labor-free carpets can just 
look for the Rugmark label. I visited the Rugmark headquarters in New 
Delhi, India last year. Mr. President, this initiative is working. It 
has succeeded in taking children out of the factories and putting them 
into schools while providing consumers with the information they need. 
To date, 1.25 million of carpets have received the Rugmark label.
  Mr. President, the progress that has been made on eradicating abusive 
and exploitative child labor is irreversible. Therefore we must 
continue to more forward. And I believe my bill allows us to do just 
that. It allows the consumer to know more about the products they buy 
and give companies that use the label the recognition they deserve.
  Our nation began this century by working to end abusive and 
exploitative child labor in America, let us close this century by 
ending child labor around the world. I urge my colleagues to support 
this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of my bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1549

       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 ``Child Labor Free Consumer 
     Information Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Secretary of Labor has conducted at least 5 
     detailed studies that document the fact that abusive and 
     exploitative child labor exists worldwide;
       (2) the Secretary of Labor has also determined, through the 
     studies referred to in paragraph (1), that child laborers are 
     often forced to work beyond their physical capacities or 
     under conditions that threaten their health, safety, and 
     development, and are denied basic educational opportunities;
       (3) in most instances, countries that have abusive and 
     exploitative child labor also experience a high adult 
     unemployment rate;
       (4) the International Labor Organization (commonly known as 
     the ``ILO'') in 1999 estimated that--

[[Page 19956]]

       (A) approximately 250,000,000 children who are ages 5 
     through 14 are working in developing countries; and
       (B) many of those children manufacture wearing apparel or 
     sporting goods that are offered for sale in the United 
     States;
       (5) consumers in the United States spend billions of 
     dollars each year on wearing apparel and sporting goods;
       (6) consumers in the United States have the right to 
     information on whether the articles of wearing apparel 
     (including any section of that wearing apparel) or sporting 
     goods that the consumers purchase are made without abusive 
     and exploitative child labor;
       (7) the rugmark labeling and monitoring system is a 
     successful model for eliminating abusive and exploitative 
     child labor in the rug industry;
       (8) the labeling of wearing apparel or sporting goods would 
     provide the information referred to in paragraph (6) to 
     consumers; and
       (9) it is important to recognize United States businesses 
     that have effective programs to ensure that products sold in 
     the United States are not made with abusive and exploitative 
     child labor.
              TITLE I--CHILD LABOR FREE LABELING STANDARDS

     SEC. 101. CHILD LABOR FREE LABELING STANDARDS.

       (a) Establishment of Labeling Standards.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor, in 
     consultation with the Child Labor Free Commission established 
     under section 201, shall issue regulations to ensure that a 
     label using the terms ``Not Made With Child Labor'', ``Child 
     Labor Free'', or any other term or symbol referring to child 
     labor does not make a false statement or suggestion that an 
     article or section of wearing apparel or sporting good was 
     not made with child labor. The regulations developed under 
     this section shall encourage the use of an easily 
     identifiable symbol or term indicating that the article or 
     section of wearing apparel or sporting good was not made with 
     child labor.
       (2) Notification on use.--
       (A) In general.--A producer, importer, exporter, 
     distributor, or other person intending to use any label 
     referred to in paragraph (1) shall submit a notification to 
     the Commission for review under subparagraph (C).
       (B) Notification.--The notification referred to in 
     subparagraph (A) shall include information concerning the 
     source of the article or section of wearing apparel or 
     sporting good to which the label will be affixed, including 
     information on--
       (i) the country in which the article or section of wearing 
     apparel or sporting good is manufactured;
       (ii) the name and location of the manufacturer; and
       (iii) any outsourcing by the manufacturer in the 
     manufacture of the article or section of wearing apparel or 
     sporting good.
       (C) Review of notification.--Upon receipt of the 
     notification, the Commission shall review the notification 
     and inform the Secretary of Labor concerning the findings of 
     the review. The permission of the Secretary of Labor shall be 
     required for the use of the label. The Secretary of Labor, in 
     consultation with the Commission, shall establish procedures 
     for granting permission to use a label under this 
     subparagraph.
       (3) Fee.--The Secretary of Labor is authorized to charge a 
     fee to cover the expenses of the Commission in reviewing a 
     notification under paragraph (2). The level of fees charged 
     under this paragraph shall not exceed the administrative 
     costs incurred in reviewing a notification. Fees collected 
     under this paragraph shall be available to the Secretary of 
     Labor for expenses incurred in the review and response of the 
     Commission under this subsection.
       (4) Applicability.--The regulations issued under paragraph 
     (1) shall apply to any label contained in or affixed to--
       (A) an article or section of wearing apparel or sporting 
     good that is exported from or offered for sale in the United 
     States;
       (B) any packaging for an article or section of wearing 
     apparel or sporting good referred to in subparagraph (A); or
       (C) any advertising for an article or section of wearing 
     apparel or sporting good referred to in subparagraph (A).
       (5) Effective date.--The regulations issued under paragraph 
     (1) shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the 
     date of publication as final regulations.
       (b) Violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission 
     Act.--It is a violation of section 5 of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) for any producer, importer, 
     exporter, distributor, or seller of any article or section of 
     wearing apparel or sporting good that is exported from or 
     offered for sale in the United States--
       (1) to falsely indicate on the label of that article or 
     section of wearing apparel or sporting good, the packaging of 
     the article or section of wearing apparel or sporting good, 
     or any advertising for the article or section of wearing 
     apparel or sporting good that the article or section of 
     wearing apparel or sporting good was not made with child 
     labor; or
       (2) to otherwise falsely claim or suggest that the article 
     (or section of that article) of wearing apparel or sporting 
     good was not made with child labor.
       (c) Amendment to the Federal Trade Commission Act.--Section 
     5(m)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 
     45(m)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``The Commission'' and 
     inserting ``Except as provided in subparagraph (D), the 
     Commission'';
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``If the Commission'' 
     and inserting ``Except as provided in subparagraph (D), if 
     the Commission''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D)(i)(I) In lieu of the applicable civil penalty under 
     subparagraph (A) or (B), in any case in which the Commission 
     commences a civil action for a violation of section 101 of 
     the Child Labor Free Consumer Information Act of 1999 under 
     subparagraph (A), under subparagraph (B) for an unfair or 
     deceptive practice that is considered to be a violation of 
     this section by reason of section 101(b) of such Act, or 
     under subparagraph (C) for a continuing failure that is 
     considered to be a violation of this section by reason of 
     section 101(b) of such Act, if that violation--
       ``(aa) is a knowing or willful violation, the amount of a 
     civil penalty for the violation shall be determined under 
     clause (ii); or
       ``(bb) is not a knowing or willful violation, no penalty 
     shall be assessed against the person, partnership, or 
     corporation that committed the violation.
       ``(II) For purposes of this subparagraph, if in an action 
     referred to in subclause (I), the Commission asserts that a 
     violation is a knowing and willful violation, the defendant 
     shall bear the burden of proving otherwise.
       ``(ii) The amount of a civil penalty for a violation under 
     clause (i)(I)(aa) that is committed shall be--
       ``(I) for an initial violation, an amount equal to the 
     greater of--
       ``(aa) 2 times the retail value of the articles of wearing 
     apparel or sporting goods mislabeled; or
       ``(bb) $200,000; and
       ``(II) for any subsequent violation, an amount equal to the 
     greater of--
       ``(aa) 4 times the retail value of the articles of wearing 
     apparel or sporting goods mislabeled; or
       ``(bb) $400,000.''.
       (d) Special Fund To Assist Children.--
       (1) Creation of fund.--There is established in the United 
     States Treasury a special fund to be known as the ``Free the 
     Children Fund''.
       (2) Transfers into fund.--There are appropriated to the 
     special fund amounts equivalent to the penalties collected 
     under this section (including the amendments made by this 
     section). The Secretary of the Treasury shall, upon request 
     of the Secretary of Labor, make the amounts in the special 
     fund available to the Secretary of Labor for use by the 
     Secretary of Labor for educational and other programs 
     described in paragraph (3).
       (3) Availability.--Amounts deposited into the special fund 
     shall be available for educational and other programs with 
     the goal of eliminating child labor.
       (e) Other Industries.--The Commission may, as appropriate, 
     develop labeling standards similar to the labeling standards 
     developed under this section for any industry that is not 
     otherwise covered under this Act and recommend to the 
     Secretary of Labor that those standards be promulgated. If 
     the standards are promulgated by the Secretary of Labor--
       (1) the provisions of this Act and the amendments made by 
     this Act shall apply to the labeling covered by those 
     standards in the same manner as they apply to any other 
     standards promulgated by the Secretary of Labor under this 
     section; and
       (2) it shall be a violation of section 5 of the Federal 
     Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) for any producer, 
     importer, exporter, distributor, or seller of any good that 
     is covered under the labeling standards and that is exported 
     from or offered for sale in the United States--
       (A) to falsely indicate on the label of that good, the 
     packaging of the good, or any related advertising that the 
     good was not made with child labor; or
       (B) to otherwise falsely claim or suggest that the good was 
     not made with child labor.

     SEC. 102. REVIEW OF PETITIONS BY THE CHILD LABOR FREE 
                   COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--In addition to the procedures established 
     under section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 
     U.S.C. 45), the Child Labor Free Commission established under 
     section 201 shall assist the Federal Trade Commission by 
     reviewing petitions under this section.
       (b) Contents of Petitions.--A petition under this section 
     shall--
       (1) be submitted in such form and in such manner as the 
     Federal Trade Commission, in consultation with the Secretary 
     of Labor and the Child Labor Free Commission, shall 
     prescribe;
       (2) contain the name of the--
       (A) petitioner; and
       (B) person or entity involved in the alleged violation of 
     the labeling standards under section 101; and
       (3) provide a detailed explanation of the alleged 
     violation, including all available evidence.

[[Page 19957]]

       (c) Review by Commission.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission shall, to the maximum 
     extent practicable, not later than 90 days after receiving a 
     petition, review the petition to determine whether there 
     appears to have been a violation of the labeling standards.
       (2) Action by the federal trade commission.--
       (A) In general.--Upon completion of a review conducted 
     under paragraph (1), the Commission shall forward the 
     petition to the Secretary of Labor, together with a report by 
     the Commission containing a determination by the Commission 
     concerning the merits of the petition, including whether a 
     violation of the labeling standards occurred and whether 
     there appears to have been a knowing and willful (within the 
     meaning of section 5(m)(1)(D)(i) of the Federal Trade 
     Commission Act, as added by section 101(c) of this Act) or 
     repeated violation of those standards.
       (B) Duties of the secretary of labor.--Upon receipt of the 
     petition and report, the Secretary of Labor shall--
       (i) forward a copy of the petition and report to the 
     Federal Trade Commission for review by the Federal Trade 
     Commission; and
       (ii) review the petition and report.
       (3) Temporary withdrawal of permission; order to cease and 
     desist.--
       (A) Temporary withdrawal of permission.--If the Secretary 
     of Labor determines, on the basis of the report referred to 
     in paragraph (2), that there is a substantial likelihood that 
     a violation of the labeling standards promulgated under 
     section 101 has occurred, the Secretary of Labor may 
     temporarily withdraw the permission granted under section 
     101(a)(2)(C) and inform the Federal Trade Commission of the 
     action and the reason for the action.
       (B) Order to cease and desist.--If the Federal Trade 
     Commission concurs with a determination of the Child Labor 
     Free Commission in the report referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     that a violation of the labeling standards has occurred, the 
     Federal Trade Commission shall take such action as may be 
     necessary under the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 
     41 et seq.) to cause the person or entity in violation of the 
     labeling standards under section 101 to cease and desist from 
     violating those standards immediately upon that concurrence.
                 TITLE II--CHILD LABOR FREE COMMISSION

     SEC. 201. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a commission to be 
     known as the ``Child Labor Free Commission''.
       (b) Membership.--
       (1) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of 17 
     members, of whom--
       (A) 1 shall be the Secretary of Commerce or a designee of 
     the Secretary of Commerce;
       (B) 1 shall be the Secretary of the Treasury or a designee 
     of the Secretary of the Treasury;
       (C) 1 shall be the United States Trade Representative or a 
     designee of the United States Trade Representative;
       (D) 1 shall be the Secretary of Labor or a designee of the 
     Secretary of Labor, who shall serve as the Chairperson of the 
     Commission;
       (E) 3 shall be representatives of nongovernmental 
     organizations that work toward the eradication of abusive and 
     exploitative child labor and the promotion of human rights, 
     appointed by the Secretary of Labor;
       (F) 3 shall be representatives of labor organizations, 
     appointed by the Secretary of Labor;
       (G) 3 shall be representatives of the wearing apparel 
     industry, appointed by the Secretary of Labor;
       (H) 3 shall be representatives of the sporting goods 
     industry, appointed by the Secretary of Labor; and
       (I) 1 additional member shall be appointed by the Secretary 
     of Labor.
       (2) Date.--The appointments of the members of the 
     Commission shall be made not later than 60 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--
       (1) Period of appointment.--Each member of the Commission 
     shall serve for a term of 4 years, except that in appointing 
     the initial members of the Commission, the Secretary of Labor 
     shall stagger the terms of the members who are not officers 
     or employees of the United States.
       (2) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the Commission shall not 
     affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as 
     the original appointment.
       (d) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 30 days 
     after the date on which all members of the Commission have 
     been appointed, the Commission shall hold its first meeting.
       (e) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet at the call of the 
     Chairperson or at the request of a majority of the members.
       (f) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission 
     shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may 
     hold hearings or other meetings.

     SEC. 202. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

       The Commission shall--
       (1) assist the Secretary of Labor in developing labeling 
     standards under section 101;
       (2) assist the Secretary of Labor in developing and 
     implementing a system to ensure compliance with the labeling 
     standards established under section 101, including--
       (A) receiving, reviewing, and making recommendations for 
     the resolution of petitions received under section 102 that 
     allege noncompliance with the labeling standards under 
     section 101;
       (B) making recommendations to the Secretary of Labor for 
     the removal of labels subject to the standards under section 
     101 that are found to be in violation of those standards;
       (C) assisting the Secretary of Labor in developing and 
     implementing a system to promote the increased use of the 
     labeling standards under section 101;
       (D) publishing, not less frequently than annually, a list 
     of persons and entities that have notified the Commission of 
     their intent to use a label under section 101(a)(2); and
       (E) publishing, not less frequently than annually, a list 
     of persons and entities found to be in violation of any 
     provision of this Act; and
       (3) not later than 1 year after the date of the 
     establishment of the Commission, commence a study into the 
     feasibility of developing an easily identifiable labeling 
     standard that the Secretary of Labor may issue to encourage 
     the use of voluntary labels that ensure consumers that an 
     article of wearing apparel or sporting good was made without 
     the use of sweatshop or exploited adult labor.

     SEC. 203. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) Hearings.--The Commission may hold such hearings, sit 
     and act at such times and places, take such testimony, and 
     receive such evidence as the Commission considers advisable 
     to carry out the duties of the Commission under this title.
       (b) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Commission may 
     secure directly from any Federal department or agency such 
     information as the Commission considers necessary to carry 
     out the duties of the Commission under this title. Upon 
     request of the Chairperson of the Commission, the head of 
     such department or agency shall furnish such information to 
     the Commission.
       (c) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United 
     States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions 
     as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       (d) Gifts.--The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of 
     gifts or donations of services or property.

     SEC. 204. COMMISSION PERSONNEL MATTERS.

       (a) Non-Federal Members.--Each member of the Commission who 
     is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall 
     serve without compensation.
       (b) Federal Members.--Each member of the Commission who is 
     an officer or employee of the United States shall serve 
     without compensation in addition to that received for that 
     member's services as an officer or employee of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICES.

       The Secretary of Labor shall, to the extent permitted by 
     law, provide the Commission with such administrative 
     services, funds, facilities, staff, and other support 
     services as may be necessary for the performance of its 
     functions.

     SEC. 206. PERMANENCY.

       Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. 
     App.) shall not apply to the Commission.
         TITLE III--RECOGNITION OF EXEMPLARY CORPORATE EFFORTS

     SEC. 301. ANNUAL REPORT.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Labor shall 
     issue a report concerning companies that are making exemplary 
     progress in ensuring that products made, sold, or distributed 
     by those companies are not made with abusive and exploitative 
     child labor.

     SEC. 302. ADDITIONAL METHODS.

       In addition to the reports made under section 301, the 
     Secretary of Labor in consultation with the Commission shall 
     develop and implement other methods of providing recognition 
     for exemplary programs carried out by companies to ensure 
     that products made, sold, or distributed by those companies 
     are not made with abusive and exploitative child labor.
                         TITLE IV--DEFINITIONS

     SEC. 401. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Child.--The term ``child'' means--
       (A) an individual who has not attained the age of 15 years, 
     as measured by the Julian calendar; or
       (B) an individual who has not attained the age of 14 years, 
     as measured by the Julian calendar, in the case of an 
     individual who resides in a country that, by law, defines a 
     child as such an individual.
       (2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Child 
     Labor Free Commission established under section 201.
       (3) Label.--The term ``label'' means a display of written, 
     printed, or graphic matter on or affixed to an article of 
     wearing apparel or a sporting good or on the packaging of the 
     article or a sporting good that meets the standards described 
     in section 101(a).
       (4) Made with child labor.--
       (A) In general.--A manufactured article or section of 
     wearing apparel or a sporting

[[Page 19958]]

     good shall be considered to have been made with child labor 
     if the article or section--
       (i) was fabricated, assembled, or processed in whole or in 
     part; or
       (ii) contains any part that was fabricated, assembled, or 
     processed in whole or in part,
     by any child described in subparagraph (B).
       (B) Covered children.--A child is described in this 
     subparagraph if that child engaged in the fabrication, 
     assembly, or processing of the article or section--
       (i) under circumstances that the Secretary of Labor 
     considers to be abusive or exploitative;
       (ii) under circumstances tantamount to involuntary 
     servitude; or
       (iii) under--

       (I) exposure to toxic substances or working conditions that 
     otherwise pose serious health hazards; or
       (II) working conditions that result in the child's being 
     deprived of basic educational opportunities.

       (5) Producer.--The term ``producer'' includes a contractor 
     or subcontractor of a manufacturer of all or part of a good.
       (6) Sporting good.--The term ``sporting good'' shall have 
     the meaning provided that term by the Secretary of Labor.
       (7) Wearing apparel.--The term ``wearing apparel'' shall 
     have the meaning provided that term by the Secretary of 
     Labor.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WELLSTONE:
  S. 1550. A bill to extend certain Medicare community nursing 
organization demonstration projects; to the Committee on Finance.


 legislation to extend certain medicare community nursing organization 
                         demonstration projects

 Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation 
which will extend Medicare funding for Community Nursing Organization 
(CNO) demonstration projects within the Health Care Financing 
Administration. These CNO programs are intended to reduce the breakup 
in the delivery of health care services, to reduce the use of costly 
emergency care services, and to improve the continuity of home health 
and ambulatory care for Medicare beneficiaries. CNOs are responsible 
for providing home health care, case management, outpatient physical 
and speech therapy, ambulance services, prosthetic devices, durable 
medical equipment, and any optional HCFA-approved services appropriate 
to prevent the need to institutionalize Medicare enrollees.
  In Minnesota, the Healthy Seniors Project provides seniors with 
information and services that have provided an extra level of health 
care and peace of mind. Through various seminars, programs, and other 
informational services, these seniors have received information on 
legal and financial matters specifically as they pertain to senior 
citizens, as well as information on the services available to help them 
function and remain in their homes.
  These CNO projects are consistent with congressional efforts to 
introduce a wider range of managed care options to Medicare 
beneficiaries. Their authorization needs to be extended in order to 
ensure a fair testing of the CNO managed care concept. We need an 
extension of this demonstration project to continue to provide an 
important example of how coordinated care can provide additional 
benefits without increasing Medicare costs. In addition, we need to 
further evaluate the impact of the CNO contribution to Medicare 
patients and to assess their capacity for operating under a fixed 
budget. Finally, this extension will not increase Medicare 
expenditures. In fact, CNOs actually save Medicare dollars by providing 
better and more accessible health care in homes and community settings, 
rather than unnecessary hospitalizations and nursing home admissions.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support these important cost-
saving demonstration projects for another three years.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Levin, 
        Ms. Mikulski, and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 1551. A bill to prohibit the importation of goods produced abroad 
with child labor, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


                   child labor deterrence act of 1999

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Child Labor 
Deterrence Act of 1999. The bill I am introducing today prohibits the 
importation of any product made, whole or in part, by children under 
the age of 15 who are employed in manufacturing or mining. This is the 
fifth time I have come to the floor of the Senate to introduce this 
bill, and I will continue to introduce it until it becomes law. I would 
like to thank Senators Hollings, Dorgan, Levin, Mikulski and Kennedy 
for joining me in this important effort as original cosponsors of this 
legislation.
  The International Labor Organization (ILO) estimates that over two 
hundred and fifty million children worldwide under the age of 15 are 
working instead of receiving a basic education. Many of these children 
begin working in factories at the age of 6 or 7, some even younger. 
They are poor, malnourished, and often forced to work 60-hour weeks for 
little or no pay.
  Child labor is most prevalent in countries with high adult 
unemployment rates. According to the ILO, some 61 percent of child 
workers, nearly 153 million children, are found in Asia; 32 percent, or 
80 million, are in Africa and 7 percent, or 175 million, live in Latin 
America. Adult unemployment rates in some nations runs over 20 percent. 
In Latin America, for example, about one in every ten children are 
workers. Furthermore, in many nations where child labor is prevalent, 
more money is spent and allocated for military expenditures than for 
education and health services.
  The situation is as deplorable as it is enormous. In many developing 
countries children represent a substantial part of the work force and 
can be found in such industries as rugs, toys, textiles, mining, and 
sports equipment manufacturing.
  For instance, it is estimated that 65% of the wearing apparel that 
Americans purchase is assembled or manufactured abroad, therefore, 
increasing the chance that these items were made by abusive and 
exploitative child labor. In the rug industry, Indian and Pakistan 
produce 95% of their rugs for export. Some of the worst abuses of child 
labor have been documented in these countries, including bonded and 
slave labor.
  Children may also be crippled physically by being forced to work too 
early in life. For example, a large-scale ILO survey in the Philippines 
found that more than 60 percent of working children were exposed to 
chemical and biological hazards, and that 40 percent experienced 
serious injuries or illnesses.
  These practices are often underground, but the ILO report points out 
that children are still being sold outright for a sum of money. Other 
times, landlords buy child workers from their tenants, or labor 
``contractor'' pay rural families in advance in order to take their 
children away to work in carpet-weaving, glass manufacturing or 
prostitution. Child slavery of this type has long been reported in 
South Asia, South-East Asia and West Africa, despite vigorous official 
denial of its existence.
  Additionally, children are increasingly being bought and sold across 
national borders by organized networks. The ILO report states that at 
least five such international networks trafficking in children exist: 
from Latin America to Europe and the Middle East; from South and South-
East Asia to northern Europe and the Middle East; a European regional 
market; an associated Arab regional market; and, a West Africa export 
market in girls.
  In Pakistan, the ILO reported in 1991 that an estimated half of the 
50,000 children working as bonded labor in Pakistan's carpet-weaving 
industry will never reach the age of 12--victims of disease and 
malnutrition.
  I have press reports from India of children freed from virtual 
slavery in the carpet factories of northern India. Twelve-year-old 
Charitra Chowdhary recounted his story--he said, ``If we moved slowly 
we were beaten on our backs with a stick. We wanted to run away but the 
doors were always locked.''
  Mr. President, that's what this bill is about, children, whose dreams 
and childhood are being sold for a pittance--to factor owners and in 
markets around the globe.
  It's about protecting children around the globe and their future. 
It's about eliminating a major form of child abuse in our world. It's 
about breaking the cycle of poverty by getting these

[[Page 19959]]

kids out of factories and into schools. It's about raising the standard 
of living in the Third World so we can compete on the quality of goods 
instead of the misery and suffering of those who make them. It's about 
assisting Third World governments to enforce their laws by ending the 
role of the United States in providing a lucrative market for goods 
made by abusive and exploitative child labor and encouraging other 
nations to do the same.
  Mr. President, unless the economic exploitation of children is 
eliminated, the potential and creative capacity of future generations 
will forever be lost to the factory floor.
  Mr. President, the Child Labor Deterrence Act of 1999 is intended to 
strengthen existing U.S. trade laws and help Third World countries 
enforce their child labor laws. The bill directs the U.S. Secretary of 
Labor to compile and maintain a list of foreign industries and their 
respective host countries that use child labor in the production of 
exports to the United States. Once the Secretary of Labor identifies a 
foreign industry, the Secretary of the Treasury is instructed to 
prohibit the importation of a product from an identified industry. The 
entry ban would not apply if a U.S. importer signs a certificate of 
origin affirming that they took reasonable steps to ensure that 
products imported from identified industries are not made by child 
labor. In addition, the President is urged to seek an agreement with 
other governments to secure an international ban on trade in the 
products of child labor. Further, any company or individual who would 
intentionally violate the law would face both civil and criminal 
penalties.
  This legislation is not about imposing our standards on the 
developing world. It's about preventing those manufacturers in the 
developing world who exploit child labor from imposing their standards 
on the United States. They are forewarned. If manufacturers and 
importers insist on investing in child labor, instead of investing in 
the future of children, I will work to assure that their products are 
barred from entering the United States.
  Mr. President, as I said when I first introduced this bill five years 
ago, it is time to end this human tragedy and our participation in it. 
It is time for greater government and corporate responsibility. No 
longer can officials in the Third World or U.S. importers turn a blind 
eye to the suffering and misery of the world's children. No longer do 
American consumers want to provide a market for goods produced by the 
sweat and toil of children. By providing a market for goods produced by 
child labor, U.S. importers have become part of the problem by 
perpetuating the impoverishment of poor families. Through this 
legislation, importers now have the opportunity to become part of the 
solution by ending this abominable practice.
  Mr. President, countries do not have to wait until poverty is 
eradicated or they are fully developed before eliminating the economic 
exploitation of children. In fact, the path to development is to 
eliminate child labor and increase expenditures on children such as 
primary education. In far too many countries, governments spend 
millions on military expenditures and fail to provide basic educational 
opportunities to its citizens. As a result, over 130 million children 
are not in primary school.
  In conclusion, Mr. President, this legislation places no undue burden 
on U.S. importers. I know of no importer, company, or department store 
that would willingly promote the exploitation of children. I know of no 
importer, company, or department store that would want their products 
and image tainted by having their products produced by child labor. And 
I know that no American consumer would knowingly purchase something 
made with abusive and exploitative child labor. These entities take 
reasonable steps to ensure the quality of their goods; they should also 
be willing to take reasonable steps to ensure that their goods are not 
produced by child labor.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I 
ask unanimous consent that a copy of my bill be printed into the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1551

       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 ``Child Labor Deterrence Act 
     of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE; POLICY.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Principle 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of the 
     Child proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United 
     Nations on November 20, 1959, states that ``. . . the child 
     shall not be admitted to employment before an appropriate 
     minimum age; he shall in no case be caused or permitted to 
     engage in any occupation or employment which would prejudice 
     his health or education, or interfere with his physical, 
     mental, or moral development . . .''.
       (2) Article 2 of the International Labor Convention No. 138 
     Concerning Minimum Age For Admission to Employment states 
     that ``The minimum age specified in pursuance of paragraph 1 
     of this article shall not be less than the age of compulsory 
     schooling and, in any case, shall not be less than 15 
     years.''.
       (3) The new International Labor Convention addressing the 
     worst forms of child labor calls on member States to take 
     immediate and effective action to prohibit and eliminate such 
     labor. According to the convention, the worst forms of child 
     labor are--
       (A) slavery;
       (B) debt bondage;
       (C) forced or compulsory labor;
       (D) the sale or trafficking of children, including the 
     forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed 
     conflict;
       (E) child prostitution;
       (F) the use of children in the production and trafficking 
     of narcotics; and
       (G) any other work that, by its nature or due to the 
     circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm 
     the health, safety, or morals of children.
       (4) According to the International Labor Organization, an 
     estimated 250,000,000 children under the age of 15 worldwide 
     are working, many of them in dangerous industries like mining 
     and fireworks.
       (5) Children under the age of 15 constitute approximately 
     22 percent of the workforce in some Asian countries, 41 
     percent of the workforce in parts of Africa, and 17 percent 
     of the workforce in many countries in Latin America.
       (6) The number of children under the age of 15 who are 
     working, and the scale of their suffering, increase every 
     year, despite the existence of more than 20 International 
     Labor Organization conventions on child labor and national 
     laws in many countries which purportedly prohibit the 
     employment of under age children.
       (7) In many countries, children under the age of 15 lack 
     either the legal standing or means to protect themselves from 
     exploitation in the workplace.
       (8) The prevalence of child labor in many developing 
     countries is rooted in widespread poverty that is 
     attributable to unemployment and underemployment, precarious 
     incomes, low living standards, and insufficient education and 
     training opportunities among adult workers.
       (9) The employment of children under the age of 15 commonly 
     deprives the children of the opportunity for basic education 
     and also denies gainful employment to millions of adults.
       (10) The employment of children under the age of 15, often 
     at pitifully low wages, undermines the stability of families 
     and ignores the importance of increasing jobs, aggregated 
     demand, and purchasing power among adults as a catalyst to 
     the development of internal markets and the achievement of 
     broadbased, self-reliant economic development in many 
     developing countries.
       (11) United Nations Children's Fund (commonly known as 
     UNICEF) estimates that by the year 2000, over 1,000,000 
     adults will be unable to read or write at a basic level 
     because such adults were forced to work as children and were 
     thus unable to devote the time to secure a basic education.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to curtail the 
     employment of children under the age of 15 in the production 
     of goods for export by--
       (1) eliminating the role of the United States in providing 
     a market for foreign products made by such children;
       (2) supporting activities and programs to extend primary 
     education, rehabilitation, and alternative skills training to 
     child workers, to improve birth registration, and to improve 
     the scope and quality of statistical information and research 
     on the commercial exploitation of such children in the 
     workplace; and
       (3) encouraging other nations to join in a ban on trade in 
     products described in paragraph (1) and to support those 
     activities and programs described in paragraph (2).
       (c) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States--
       (1) to actively discourage the employment of children under 
     the age of 15 in the production of goods for export or 
     domestic consumption;

[[Page 19960]]

       (2) to strengthen and supplement international trading 
     rules with a view to renouncing the use of under age children 
     in the production of goods for export as a means of competing 
     in international trade;
       (3) to amend Federal law to prohibit the entry into 
     commerce of products resulting from the labor of under age 
     children; and
       (4) to offer assistance to foreign countries to improve the 
     enforcement of national laws prohibiting the employment of 
     children under the age of 15 and to increase assistance to 
     alleviate the underlying poverty that is often the cause of 
     the commercial exploitation of such children.

     SEC. 3. UNITED STATES INITIATIVE TO CURTAIL INTERNATIONAL 
                   TRADE IN PRODUCTS OF CHILD LABOR.

       In pursuit of the policy set forth in this Act, the 
     President is urged to seek an agreement with the government 
     of each country that conducts trade with the United States 
     for the purpose of securing an international ban on trade in 
     products of child labor.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Child.--The term ``child'' means--
       (A) an individual who has not attained the age of 15, as 
     measured by the Julian calendar; or
       (B) an individual who has not attained the age of 14, as 
     measured by the Julian calendar, in the case of a country 
     identified under section 5 whose national laws define a child 
     as such an individual.
       (2) Effective identification period.--The term ``effective 
     identification period'' means, with respect to a foreign 
     industry or host country, the period that--
       (A) begins on the date of that issue of the Federal 
     Register in which the identification of the foreign industry 
     or host country is published under section 5(e)(1)(A); and
       (B) terminates on the date of that issue of the Federal 
     Register in which the revocation of the identification 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) is published under section 
     5(e)(1)(B).
       (3) Entered.--The term ``entered'' means entered, or 
     withdrawn from a warehouse for consumption, in the customs 
     territory of the United States.
       (4) Extraction.--The term ``extraction'' includes mining, 
     quarrying, pumping, and other means of extraction.
       (5) Foreign industry.--The term ``foreign industry'' 
     includes any entity that produces, manufactures, assembles, 
     processes, or extracts an article in a host country.
       (6) Host country.--The term ``host country'' means any 
     foreign country, and any possession or territory of a foreign 
     country that is administered separately for customs purposes 
     (including any designated zone within such country, 
     possession, or territory) in which a foreign industry is 
     located.
       (7) Manufactured article.--The term ``manufactured 
     article'' means any good that is fabricated, assembled, or 
     processed. The term also includes any mineral resource 
     (including any mineral fuel) that is entered in a crude 
     state. Any mineral resource that at entry has been subjected 
     to only washing, crushing, grinding, powdering, levigation, 
     sifting, screening, or concentration by flotation, magnetic 
     separation, or other mechanical or physical processes shall 
     be treated as having been processed for the purposes of this 
     Act.
       (8) Products of child labor.--An article shall be treated 
     as being a product of child labor--
       (A) if, with respect to the article, a child was engaged in 
     the manufacture, fabrication, assembly, processing, or 
     extraction, in whole or in part; and
       (B) if the labor was performed--
       (i) in exchange for remuneration (regardless to whom paid), 
     subsistence, goods, or services, or any combination of the 
     foregoing;
       (ii) under circumstances tantamount to involuntary 
     servitude; or
       (iii) under exposure to toxic substances or working 
     conditions otherwise posing serious health hazards.
       (9) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'', except for purposes 
     of section 5, means the Secretary of the Treasury.

     SEC. 5. IDENTIFICATION OF FOREIGN INDUSTRIES AND THEIR 
                   RESPECTIVE HOST COUNTRIES THAT UTILIZE CHILD 
                   LABOR IN EXPORT OF GOODS.

       (a) Identification of Industries and Host Countries..--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Labor (in this section 
     referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall undertake periodic 
     reviews using all available information, including 
     information made available by the International Labor 
     Organization and human rights organizations (the first such 
     review to be undertaken not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act), to identify any foreign 
     industry that--
       (A) does not comply with applicable national laws 
     prohibiting child labor in the workplace;
       (B) utilizes child labor in connection with products that 
     are exported; and
       (C) has on a continuing basis exported products of child 
     labor to the United States.
       (2) Treatment of identification.--For purposes of this Act, 
     the identification of a foreign industry shall be treated as 
     also being an identification of the host country.
       (b) Petitions Requesting Identification.--
       (1) Filing.--Any person may file a petition with the 
     Secretary requesting that a particular foreign industry and 
     its host country be identified under subsection (a). The 
     petition must set forth the allegations in support of the 
     request.
       (2) Action on receipt of petition.--Not later than 90 days 
     after receiving a petition under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall--
       (A) decide whether or not the allegations in the petition 
     warrant further action by the Secretary in regard to the 
     foreign industry and its host country under subsection (a); 
     and
       (B) notify the petitioner of the decision under 
     subparagraph (A) and the facts and reasons supporting the 
     decision.
       (c) Consultation and Comment.--Before identifying a foreign 
     industry and its host country under subsection (a), the 
     Secretary shall--
       (1) consult with the United States Trade Representative, 
     the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, and the 
     Secretary of the Treasury regarding such action;
       (2) hold at least 1 public hearing within a reasonable time 
     for the receipt of oral comment from the public regarding 
     such a proposed identification;
       (3) publish notice in the Federal Register--
       (A) that such an identification is being considered;
       (B) of the time and place of the hearing scheduled under 
     paragraph (2); and
       (C) inviting the submission within a reasonable time of 
     written comment from the public; and
       (4) take into account the information obtained under 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).
       (d) Revocation of Identification.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary 
     may revoke the identification of any foreign industry and its 
     host country under subsection (a) if information available to 
     the Secretary indicates that such action is appropriate.
       (2) Report of secretary.--No revocation under paragraph (1) 
     may take effect earlier than the 60th day after the date on 
     which the Secretary submits to the Congress a written 
     report--
       (A) stating that in the opinion of the Secretary the 
     foreign industry and host country concerned do not utilize 
     child labor in connection with products that are exported; 
     and
       (B) stating the facts on which such opinion is based and 
     any other reason why the Secretary considers the revocation 
     appropriate.
       (3) Procedure.--No revocation under paragraph (1) may take 
     effect unless the Secretary--
       (A) publishes notice in the Federal Register that such a 
     revocation is under consideration and invites the submission 
     within a reasonable time of oral and written comment from the 
     public on the revocation; and
       (B) takes into account the information received under 
     subparagraph (A) before preparing the report required under 
     paragraph (2).
       (e) Publication.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) promptly publish in the Federal Register--
       (A) the name of each foreign industry and its host country 
     identified under subsection (a);
       (B) the text of the decision made under subsection 
     (b)(2)(A) and a statement of the facts and reasons supporting 
     the decision; and
       (C) the name of each foreign industry and its host country 
     with respect to which an identification has been revoked 
     under subsection (d); and
       (2) maintain and publish in the Federal Register a current 
     list of all foreign industries and their respective host 
     countries identified under subsection (a).

     SEC. 6. PROHIBITION ON ENTRY.

       (a) Prohibition.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     during the effective identification period for a foreign 
     industry and its host country no article that is a product of 
     that foreign industry may be entered into the customs 
     territory of the United States.
       (2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the entry 
     of an article--
       (A) for which a certification that meets the requirements 
     of subsection (b) is provided and the article, or the 
     packaging in which it is offered for sale, contains, in 
     accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary, a 
     label stating that the article is not a product of child 
     labor;
       (B) that is entered under any subheading in subchapter IV 
     or VI of chapter 98 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
     United States (relating to personal exemptions); or
       (C) that was exported from the foreign industry and its 
     host country and was en route to the United States before the 
     first day of the effective identification period for such 
     industry and its host country.
       (b) Certification That Article is not a Product of Child 
     Labor.--
       (1) Form and content.--The Secretary shall prescribe the 
     form and content of documentation, for submission in 
     connection with the entry of an article, that satisfies the 
     Secretary that the exporter of the article in the host 
     country, and the importer of the article into the customs 
     territory of the United States, have undertaken reasonable

[[Page 19961]]

     steps to ensure, to the extent practicable, that the article 
     is not a product of child labor.
       (2) Reasonable steps.--For purposes of paragraph (1), 
     ``reasonable steps'' include--
       (A) in the case of the exporter of an article in the host 
     country--
       (i) having entered into a contract, with an organization 
     described in paragraph (4) in that country, providing for the 
     inspection of the foreign industry's facilities for the 
     purpose of certifying that the article is not a product of 
     child labor, and affixing a label, protected under the 
     copyright or trademark laws of the host country, that 
     contains such certification; and
       (ii) having affixed to the article a label described in 
     clause (i); and
       (B) in the case of the importer of an article into the 
     customs territory of the United States, having required the 
     certification and label described in subparagraph (A) and 
     setting forth the terms and conditions of the acquisition or 
     provision of the imported article.
       (3) Written evidence.--The documentation required by the 
     Secretary under paragraph (1) shall include written evidence 
     that the reasonable steps set forth in paragraph (2) have 
     been taken.
       (4) Certifying organizations.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall compile and maintain a 
     list of independent, internationally credible organizations, 
     in each host country identified under section 5, that have 
     been established for the purpose of--
       (i) conducting inspections of foreign industries,
       (ii) certifying that articles to be exported from that 
     country are not products of child labor, and
       (iii) labeling the articles in accordance with paragraph 
     (2)(A).
       (B) Organization.--Each certifying organization shall 
     consist of representatives of nongovernmental child welfare 
     organizations, manufacturers, exporters, and neutral 
     international organizations.

     SEC. 7. PENALTIES.

       (a) Unlawful Acts.--It shall be unlawful, during the 
     effective identification period applicable to a foreign 
     industry and its host country--
       (1) to attempt to enter any article that is a product of 
     that industry if the entry is prohibited under section 
     6(a)(1); or
       (2) to violate any regulation prescribed under section 8.
       (b) Civil Penalty.--Any person who commits an unlawful act 
     set forth in subsection (a) shall be liable for a civil 
     penalty not to exceed $25,000.
       (c) Criminal Penalty.--In addition to being liable for a 
     civil penalty under subsection (b), any person who 
     intentionally commits an unlawful act set forth in subsection 
     (a) shall be, upon conviction, liable for a fine of not less 
     than $10,000 and not more than $35,000, or imprisonment for 1 
     year, or both.
       (d) Construction.--The unlawful acts set forth in 
     subsection (a) shall be treated as violations of the customs 
     laws for purposes of applying the enforcement provisions of 
     the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1202 et seq.), including--
       (1) the search, seizure, and forfeiture provisions;
       (2) section 592 (relating to penalties for entry by fraud, 
     gross negligence, or negligence); and
       (3) section 619 (relating to compensation to informers).

     SEC. 8. REGULATIONS.

       The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to carry out the 
     provisions of this Act.

     SEC. 9. UNITED STATES SUPPORT FOR DEVELOPMENTAL ALTERNATIVES 
                   FOR UNDER AGE CHILD WORKERS.

       In order to carry out section 2(c)(4), there is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the President the sum of--
       (1) $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 through 2004 
     for the United States contribution to the International Labor 
     Organization for the activities of the International Program 
     on the Elimination of Child Labor; and
       (2) $100,000 for fiscal year 2000 for the United States 
     contribution to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights 
     for those activities relating to bonded child labor that are 
     carried out by the Subcommittee and Working Group on 
     Contemporary Forms of Slavery.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REID:
  S. 1552. A bill to eliminate the limitation on judicial jurisdiction 
imposed by section 377 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and 
Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.


                 Legal Amnesty Restoration Act of 1999

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Legal Amnesty 
Restoration Act of 1999.
  This legislation would repeal the limitation on judicial jurisdiction 
imposed by an obscure, but very lethal provision of the Illegal 
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Tucked 
into that massive piece of legislation was a provision, Section 377, 
which, in effect, stripped the Federal courts of jurisdiction to 
adjudicate legalization claims against the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service. Through this limitation, Section 377 has caused 
significant hardships, and denied due process and fundamental fairness, 
for hundreds of thousands of hard working immigrants, including several 
thousand in my home State of Nevada.
  As a direct result of the 1996 legislation, the Ninth Circuit Court 
of Appeals, with its hands tied by the 377 language, issued a series of 
rulings in which it dismissed the claims of class members and revoked 
thousands of work permits and stays from deportation. In Nevada alone, 
up to 18,000 people had been affected. Good, hard-working people who 
have been in the United States and paying taxes for more than ten 
years, suddenly lost their jobs and the ability to support their 
families.
  I say to my colleagues that I have met with many of these people on 
several occasions, and I have been, firsthand, the pain that this cruel 
process had caused. Men and women who once knew the dignity of a 
decent, legal wage have been forced to seek work underground in the 
effort to make ends meet. Families who lived in homes have been 
disrupted by an inability to pay the mortgage. Parents who had 
fulfilled dreams of sending their children to college have seen those 
dreams turn into nightmares. Children who know that something is 
desperately wrong by the simple fact that Mom and Dad have not been 
working for almost a year.
  Mr. President, allow me to add a brief history of what has caused 
these most unfortunate consequences. During the 99th Congress, we 
passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. This law 
provided a one-time opportunity for certain aliens already in the 
United States who met specific criteria to legalize their status. In 
order to do so, these aliens had to show that they had resided 
continuously in the United States since January 1, 1982.
  The statute established a one-year period from May of 1987 to May of 
1988, during which the INS was directed to accept and adjudicate 
applications from persons who wished to legalize their status. In 
implementing the congressionally-mandated legislation program, however, 
the INS created new criteria and a number of eligibility rules that 
were nowhere to be found in the 1986 legislation. The result was that 
thousands of persons who were in fact eligible for legalization were 
told they were ineligible or were blocked from filing legislation 
applications.
  Several class-action lawsuits were initiated, and several federal 
district courts entered interim relief orders blocking deportations 
while the additional INS restrictions were debated in the courts. These 
orders also typically required the INS to grant class members temporary 
employment authorization pending a final resolution of the legal cases. 
However, by the time the Supreme Court ruled in 1993 that the INS had 
indeed contravened the 1986 legislation, the one-year period for 
applying for legalization had obviously passed.
  The Court, therefore, divided these people into three different 
classes for the purposes of determining their standing to sue for the 
opportunity to submit a legalization application. These Classes are 
summarized as follows:
  Class I: Class members who actually attempted to file applications 
with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, but were physically 
prevented from doing so. This policy has led to the term ``front-
desked'' class members.
  Class II: Class members who did not actually attempt to file an 
application, but for whom the INS's ``front-desking'' policy was a 
``substantial cause'' for their failure to apply.
  Class III: Class members who were discouraged from even visiting an 
INS office because of the INS's very publicized effort at misinforming 
them that they were ineligible and should not even apply.
  While conceding that it had unlawfully narrowed eligibility for 
legalization, the INS was clearly dissatisfied

[[Page 19962]]

with the Supreme Court decision. Consequently, the agency employed a 
different, much more clever approach. Rather than affording the people 
within these classes due process of law, the INS succeeded in slipping 
an obscure amendment into the massive 1996 Illegal Immigrant Reform and 
Responsibility Act which, in effect, stripped the federal courts of 
their jurisdiction over the claims of Class II and Class III members. 
That provision was Section 377, and is now, unfortunately, the law of 
the land.
  Mr. President, as I stated earlier, my legislation would repeal 
Section 377 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act of 
1996. This course of action would allow the courts, including those 
with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals where Nevada is situated, to 
reinstate the work permits which were revoked effective September 30, 
1998. The restoration of these work permits is critical, for it would 
allow those immigrants who satisfy the specified criteria to 
financially support themselves and their families through legal 
employment while they seek legalized status.
  In order to ensure that the Immigration and Naturalization Service 
implements the legalization program mandated by the Congress in 1986, 
my legislation would change the date of registry from 1973 to 1984. 
Those immigrants who were wrongfully denied the opportunity to legalize 
their status will finally be afforded that which they deserved thirteen 
years ago. Ironically, it was also during 1986 that the Congress last 
changed the date of registry.
  Making this change, quite simply, just makes sense. We changed the 
date in 1986 because we recognized that undocumented immigrants who had 
been in the United States continuously for more than fifteen years were 
highly unlikely to leave. Furthermore, illegal, undocumented immigrants 
do not pay their fair share of taxes. This was precisely the rationale 
considered by the 99th Congress when it debated and passed the 
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986; legislation intentionally 
circumvented by the INS.
  Finally, Mr. President, my legislation would extend the date of 
registry through 1990 for a narrow class of persons who have been 
subjected to fraudulent or illegal activity on the part of INS 
officials or employees. This aspect of my bill is very important to the 
immigrant community in Nevada as several local INS officials have been 
convicted, indicted and/or accused of illegal activity in the process 
of granting or denying benefits to immigrants.
  Mr. President, I don't pretend that my legislation will solve all the 
problems of our immigration and legalization procedures. However, there 
comes a time when a strong, moral government of the people must make 
every effort to correct the mistakes of the past. My legislation simply 
recognizes that the United States government, through the Immigration 
and Naturalization Services, made some serious errors which, in the 
name of due process and fundamental fairness, must be remedied.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 1555. A bill to provide sufficient funds for the research 
necessary to enable an effective public health approach to the problems 
of youth suicide and violence, and to develop ways to intervene early 
and effectively with children and adolescents who suffer depression or 
other mental illness, so as to avoid the tragedy of suicide, violence, 
and longterm illness and disability; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.


    public health response to youth suicide and violence act of 1999

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today with great pleasure to 
introduce the ``Public Health Response to Youth Suicide and Violence 
Act of 1999.'' I would also like to thank my colleague Senator Kennedy 
for joining me as a co-sponsor of this legislation.
  All too often we read in the paper or see on TV another tragedy 
involving our children. These stories about violence, death, and 
suicide have become all too familiar and commonplace in our nation. 
Unfortunately, the children who commit these acts often suffer from a 
mental illness.
  As I have said many times before the human brain is the organ of the 
mind and just like the other organs of our body, it is subject to 
illness. And just as illnesses to our other organs require treatment, 
so too do illnesses of the brain.
  And while we have learned so much more about mental illness and 
medical science can accurately diagnosis mental illnesses and treat 
those afflicted, the same cannot be said for children and adolescents. 
Unfortunately, we still know very little about the causes of mental 
illness in children and adolescents and moreover, the appropriate 
treatment for these illnesses.
  Before I proceed there is one thing I want to make absolutely clear: 
I am not for one minute saying we should lessen our focus on law 
enforcement or incarceration of convicted offenders. Instead, I am 
simply saying we might be able to prevent some of the tragedies I have 
mentioned if we knew more about the cause and appropriate treatment for 
mental illness in children and adolescents.
  Today, suicide is the 3rd leading cause of death among individuals 
between the age of 15 to 24 and the 4th leading cause of death in those 
10 to 14 years of age. Estimates show about 1 in 10 children and 
adolescents suffer from a mental illness that is severe enough to cause 
some level of impairment. Additionally, many parents with a child 
suffering from a serious mental disorder believe their child will 
become violent without appropriate treatment.
  Beyond the possibility of suicide and violence, children not 
receiving treatment for mental disorders not only suffer, cannot learn, 
and may not form healthy relationships with peers or family, but face 
an increased likelihood of incarceration as juveniles and adults.
  I have come to the conclusion that we must make a renewed investment 
into discovering the cause and the appropriate treatment of mental 
illness in children and adolescents. Why is it that certain children 
may be afflicted with a mental illness and others are not? What is the 
best course of treatment for a child diagnosed with a mental illness?
  Everyone acknowledges that there is a critical lack of information in 
the area of child and adolescent mental illnesses and in particular the 
causes and appropriate treatment of such illnesses.
  With this in mind, I cannot think of a better entity to take the lead 
in this endeavor to increase our research and understanding of child 
and adolescent mental illness than the National Institute of Mental 
Health. The Institute is already at the forefront of mental illness 
research and I believe it is uniquely qualified to address the 
connection between mental illness and youth suicide and violence.
  The ``Public Health Response to Youth Suicide and Violence Act of 
1999'' simply seeks to reduce incidences of youth suicide and violence 
through increased research by the National Institutes of Mental Health 
(NIMH) of children and adolescents suffering from depression or other 
mental illness.
  By providing for increased research the Bill addresses a critical 
lack of knowledge in the area of child and adolescent mental illnesses 
and in particular the causes and appropriate treatment of such 
illnesses that often lead to youth suicide and violence.
  The Bill authorizes $200 million for FY 2000 to expand and intensify 
research aimed at better understanding the underlying causes of mental 
disorders that lead to youth suicide and violence.
  The Bill contains mandatory activities to be carried out by the 
Director of NIMH that include developing researchers who are trained in 
the area of childhood mental disorders in order to better understand 
the development of brain and mental disorders in children, pursue 
research into the relationship between mental disorders and youth 
violence and suicide and to develop effective treatments for these 
disorders.
  Additionally, the Director of NIMH will work with the Director of the 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

[[Page 19963]]

and other appropriate agencies to develop a model to train primary care 
physicians, nurses, school psychologists, teachers, and other 
responsible individuals about mental disorders in children.
  The Bill also contains permissible activities the Director of NIMH 
may carry out that include examining the potential of public health 
programs that combine individual, family, and community level 
interventions to address suicide and violence and to identify related 
best practices. Additionally, the Director may develop and evaluate 
programs aimed at prevention, early recognition, and intervention of 
depression, youth suicide, and violence in diverse school and community 
settings.
  In conclusion, I would simply restate that I believe expanding 
research to reduce incidences of youth suicide and violence through 
increased research of children and adolescents suffering from 
depression or other mental illness is necessary and I would urge my 
colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill and a 
summary of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1555

       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 ``Public Health Response to 
     Youth Suicide and Violence Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Suicide is the third leading cause of death among young 
     people 15 to 24 years of age, following unintentional 
     injuries and homicide, and is the fourth leading cause of 
     death in those 10 to 14 years of age. Scientific research has 
     found that there are an estimated 8 to 25 attempted suicides 
     to 1 completion, and the strongest risk factors for attempted 
     suicide in youth are depression and alcohol or drug use.
       (2) There is a critical need for additional research into 
     the underlying causes of youth violence-both suicide and 
     violence against others. 50 percent of parents with a child 
     suffering from a serious mental disorder believe their child 
     would become violent without appropriate treatment and 
     services.
       (3) A public health model should seek to ascertain ways to 
     identify children and adolescents who are depressed or 
     suffering from other mental or emotional disorders that might 
     result in violent behavior against themselves or others, as 
     well as long-term illness disability, and to intervene before 
     that occurs.
       (4) Not enough is known about serious mental disorders in 
     adolescents and children, devastating illnesses which often 
     lead to school failure, suicide, and violence. A primary 
     reason for this is the lack of trained scientific 
     investigators in this area of research. It is critical that 
     increased efforts be made to strengthen the scientific 
     expertise and capability in the area of child mental 
     disorders.
       (5) About 1 in 10 children and adolescents suffer from 
     mental illness severe enough to cause some level of 
     impairment, but fewer than 1 in 5 of these children receives 
     treatment. Children who go untreated not only suffer, cannot 
     learn, and may not form healthy relationships with peers or 
     family, but face an increased likelihood of eventual 
     incarceration as juveniles and adults.
       (6) Prevention of youth suicide and violence requires a 
     long-term commitment to comprehensive, cost effective, and 
     sustainable interventions directed at known risk factors, and 
     to the evaluation of their success in diverse community 
     settings by targeting multiple risk factors that predispose 
     them to suicide, delinquency and violence.
       (7) Much more information is needed concerning the 
     psychotherapeutic and service system treatment of serious 
     mental illness in children as well as barriers to appropriate 
     and effective treatment and services for these children, in 
     the health care and educational systems.

     SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF ACTIVITIES.

       Subpart 16 of part C of title IV of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285p et seq) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

     ``SEC. 464U-1. EXPANSION OF RESEARCH ACTIVITIES WITH RESPECT 
                   TO CHILDREN.

       ``(a) In General.--The Director of the National Institute 
     of Mental Health shall use amounts made available under this 
     section to carry out activities to expand and intensify 
     research aimed at better understanding the underlying 
     developmental and other causes of mental disorders that lead 
     to youth suicide and violence.
       ``(b) Mandatory Activities.--To carry out the purpose 
     described in subsection (a), the Director of the Institute 
     shall--
       ``(1) work to develop investigators who are trained in the 
     area of childhood mental disorders in order to continue the 
     effort to understand the developing brain and mental 
     disorders in children and to strengthen the capacity to 
     ascertain the factors underlying suicide and other violent 
     behavior in youth;
       ``(2) expand support for basic research that has led to a 
     better understanding of the structure, function and circuitry 
     of the brain, and which promises to yield even more 
     understanding as neuroimaging techniques become even more 
     sophisticated;
       ``(3) carry out activities to further encourage research to 
     clarify--
       ``(A) the relationship between mental disorders and youth 
     violence and suicide;
       ``(B) the first emergence of mental illnesses in children, 
     including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and obsessive-
     compulsive disorder;
       ``(C) effective early treatments for such illnesses and 
     disorders; and
       ``(D) in collaboration with the Director of the Centers for 
     Mental Health Services, where appropriate, the manner in 
     which to effectively disseminate information derived under 
     this paragraph to care-providers in the community;
       ``(4) in order to address the major problem of lack of 
     recognition of mental disorders, and to ensure appropriate 
     diagnosis and treatment, continue to encourage, in 
     collaboration with the Administrator of the Agency for Health 
     Care Policy and Research, where appropriate, services 
     research aimed at better understanding the impact of mental 
     disorders on children, on their families, on the health care 
     system, and on schools as well as services research aimed at 
     improving care-provider and educator knowledge of mental 
     disorders in children;
       ``(5) seek to develop, conduct research on, and in 
     collaboration with the Director of the Center for Mental 
     Health Services, where appropriate, disseminate information 
     about, mechanisms for avoiding the inappropriate 
     criminalization of children with mental disorders and the 
     appropriate treatment of any such children in criminal 
     settings;
       ``(6) in collaboration with the Director of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, carry out additional 
     activities to better understand the scope and effect of 
     childhood mental disorders, including epidemiological 
     monitoring and surveillance of childhood mental illness, 
     suicide and incidence of violence;
       ``(7) in collaboration with the Director of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, families dealing with mental 
     illness in their children, and other appropriate agencies, 
     carry out activities to develop a model curriculum of 
     education about mental disorders in children for use in the 
     training of primary care physicians, nurses, school 
     psychologists, teachers, and others individuals responsible 
     for the care of children on an ongoing basis; and
       ``(8) in collaboration with the Director of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, establish a system to provide 
     technical assistance to schools and communities to provide 
     public health information and best practices to enable such 
     schools and communities to handle high-risk youth.
       ``(c) Permissible Activities.--To carry out the purpose 
     described in subsection (a), the Director of the Institute 
     may carry out activities--
       ``(1) relating to research concerning the effects of early 
     trauma and exposure to violence on further childhood 
     development;
       ``(2) that ensure that the goals of all intervention 
     development under this section include a focus on both 
     effectiveness and sustainability;
       ``(3) for the development and evaluation of programs aimed 
     at prevention, early recognition, and intervention for 
     depression, youth suicide and violence in diverse school and 
     community settings to determine their effectiveness and 
     sustainability;
       ``(4) to examine the feasibility of public health programs 
     combining individual, family and community level 
     interventions to address suicide and violence and identify 
     related best practices; and
       ``(5) to disseminate information to families, schools, and 
     communities concerning the recognition of childhood 
     depression, suicide risk, substance abuse, and Attention 
     Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in order to decrease the 
     stigma associated with seeking help for such conditions.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $200,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2000, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     each of fiscal years 2001 through 2004.''.
                                  ____


    Public Health Response To Youth Suicide and Violence Act of 1999

       The Bill seeks to reduce incidences of youth suicide and 
     violence through increased research by the National 
     Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) of children and 
     adolescents suffering from depression or other mental 
     illness.
       By providing for increased research the Bill addresses a 
     critical lack of knowledge in the area of child and 
     adolescent mental illnesses and in particular the causes and 
     appropriate treatment of such illnesses that often lead to 
     youth suicide and violence.

[[Page 19964]]




   the need for increased research into child and adolescent mental 
                                illness

       Tody suicide is the 3rd leading cause of death among 
     individuals between the age of 15 to 24 and about 1 in 10 
     children and adolescents suffer from a mental illness that is 
     severe enough to cause some level of impairment.
       Beyond possible suicide and violence, children not 
     receiving treatment for mental disorder not only suffer, 
     cannot learn, and may not form healthy relationships with 
     peers or family, but face an increased likelihood of 
     incarceration as juveniles and adults.


     increased research by the national institute for mental health

       The Bill authorizes $200 million for FY 2000 and such sums 
     as may be necessary thereafter to expand and intensify 
     research aimed at better understanding the underlying causes 
     of mental disorders that lead to youth suicide and violence.
       Mandatory activities by the Director of NIMH include 
     developing researchers who are trained in the area of 
     childhood mental disorders in order to better understand the 
     development of brain and mental disorders in children. Pursue 
     research into the relationship between mental disorders and 
     youth violence and suicide and to develop effective 
     treatments for these disorders.
       Additionally, the Director or NIMH will work with the 
     Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
     and other appropriate agencies to develop a model to train 
     primary care physicians, nurses, school psychologists, 
     teachers, and other responsible individuals about mental 
     disorders in children.
       Permissible activities by the Director of NIMH include 
     examining the potential of public health programs that 
     combine individual, family, and community level interventions 
     to address suicide and violence to identify related best 
     practices. Additionally, the Director may carry out 
     activities that develop and evaluate programs aimed at 
     prevention, early recognition, and intervention of 
     depression, youth suicide, and violence in diverse school and 
     community settings.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join Senator Abraham 
as a sponsor of the INS Reform and Border Security Act. This 
legislation will remedy many of the problems that currently plague the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service. It will ensure strong 
enforcement of our immigration laws, and also ensure that immigration 
and citizenship services are provided expeditiously and with greater 
respect for dignity of those who benefit from these services.
  These two missions--enforcement and services--are equally important. 
Both are suffering under the current INS structure. The services are in 
especially dire straits. Over two million would-be US citizens are now 
trapped in an INS backlog. Individuals languish for years waiting for 
their naturalization and permanent resident applications to be 
processed. Files are lost. Fingerprints go stale. Courteous behavior is 
too often the exception, rather than the rule. Application fees 
continue to increase--yet poor service and long delays continue as 
well.
  On the enforcement side, the immigration laws are being applied 
inconsistently. Detention and parole policies and procedures vary 
widely from district to district. All too frequently, national 
priorities and directives are ignored at the district level.
  Many of these problems are not new. During Commissioner Doris 
Meissner's impressive tenure, the INS has made significant progress in 
trying to address the agency's problems. She has done an excellent job 
under the current structure. But, that structure has proven to be 
unworkable.
  The goal of INS Reform and Border Security Act is to put the INS 
house in order. It will untangle the overlapping and often confusing 
organizational structure of the agency and replace it with two clear 
chains of command--one for enforcement and the other for services. 
These two equally important divisions will report, through their 
respective directors, to an Associate Attorney General who will head 
the Immigration Affairs Agency. This shared central authority over the 
two branches will ensure a uniform and harmonious immigration policy. 
Coordination of the two branches is imperative for the efficient 
functioning of the agency, and for maintaining a coherent immigration 
policy.
  There is strong bipartisan agreement that the INS must be reformed. 
But restructuring must be done right. Successful reform must separate 
the enforcement and service functions while maintaining a strong 
central authority for uniform policy-making, clear accountability, and 
fiscal responsibility. The INS Reform and Border Security Act 
accomplishes these aims. The new immigration will be a major 
improvement over the current INS. I urge my colleagues to join in 
supporting the INS Reform and Border Security Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED (for himself, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Harkin, 
        and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1556. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
of 1965 to strengthen the involvement of parents in the education of 
their children, and for the other purposes; to the Committee on Heath, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.


 parental accountability, recruitment, and education national training 
                              act of 1999

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Parental 
Accountability, Recruitment, and Education National Training (PARENT) 
Act of 1999, which seeks to increase parental involvement in the 
educational lives of their children.
  Mr. President, research, experience, and reason tell us that 
providing parents with opportunities to play active roles in their 
children's schools empowers them to help their children excel. When 
parents are actively involved in their child's education, not only do 
their own children go further, but their child's school also improves 
to the benefit of all students. And, as I have witnessed in Rhode 
Island, and I am sure my colleagues can attest to this in their home 
states, our best schools are not simply those with the finest teachers 
and principals, but those which strive to engage parents in the 
education of their children.
  A recent National PTA survey revealed that 91% of parents recognize 
the importance of involvement in their children's schools. 
Unfortunately, even as we extol the virtue of parental involvement, we 
must recognize that reality falls far short of the goal. The National 
PTA survey also found that roughly half the parents surveyed felt they 
were inadequately informed about ways in which they could participate 
in schools, or even gain access to basic information about their 
children's studies and their children's teachers. There are also other 
obstacles to greater parental involvement, such as working parents who 
find it difficult to get to schools and be involved or parents who have 
had negative schooling experiences and are wary of entering schools to 
participate in their children's education.
  With 73% of parents favoring a federal effort to help schools get 
parents more involved with their children's education, the upcoming 
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 
provides an opportunity to help bring schools and parents together, and 
to ensure parents have the tools to meaningfully and effectively get 
involved in their children's education. While the ESEA currently 
contains parental involvement provisions, they mainly apply to Title I 
schools and students, and have not been fully implemented.
  That is why I am pleased to be joined by Senators Murray, Kennedy, 
Harkin, and Bingaman and Representative Lynn Woolsey in the other body 
in introducing the PARENT Act. This legislation would amend the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to bolster existing and 
add new parental involvement provisions.
  The PARENT Act requires that all schools implement effective, 
research-based parental involvement best practices. It also seeks to 
improve parental access to information about their children's education 
and the school's parental involvement policies; ensure that 
professional development activities provide training to teachers and 
administrators on how to foster relationships with parents and 
encourage parental involvement; utilize technology to expand efforts to 
connect schools and teachers with parents; and promote parental 
involvement in drug and violence prevention programs. In addition, the 
PARENT Act requires any state seeking funding under ESEA to describe, 
implement, and evaluate parental involvement policies and practices.

[[Page 19965]]

  To succeed in the endeavor of increasing parental involvement, we 
must depend on parents, teachers, and school administrators throughout 
the country to work collaboratively to implement effective programs. 
However, federal leadership is needed to provide schools, teachers, and 
parents with the tools adequate to this task.
  Mr. President, the bottom line of federal support for education is to 
increase student achievement. Parental involvement is an essential 
component to ensuring that our students succeed. This legislation is 
strongly supported by the National PTA, and I urge my colleagues to 
join Senators Murray, Kennedy, Harkin, Bingaman, and me in supporting 
the PARENT Act, and working for its inclusion in the ESEA 
reauthorization.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 
legislation be printed in the Record.
  The being no objection, bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, 
as follows:

                                S. 1556

       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 ``Parental Accountability, 
     Recruitment, and Education National Training Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

       Except as otherwise specifically provided, whenever in this 
     Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an 
     amendment to, or a repeal of, a section or other provision, 
     the reference shall be considered to be made to a section or 
     other provision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.).

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Parents are the first and most influential educators of 
     their children.
       (2) The Federal Government must provide leadership, 
     technical assistance, and financial support to States and 
     local educational agencies, as partners, in helping the 
     agencies implement successful and effective parental 
     involvement policies and programs that lead to improved 
     student achievement.
       (3) State and local education officials, as well as 
     teachers, principals, and other staff at the school level, 
     must work as partners with the parents of the children they 
     serve.
       (4) Research has documented that, regardless of the 
     economic, ethnic, or cultural background of the family, 
     parental involvement in a child's education is a major factor 
     in determining success in school.
       (5) Parental involvement in a child's education contributes 
     to positive outcomes such as improved grades and test scores, 
     higher expectations for student achievement, better school 
     attendance, improved homework completion rates, decreased 
     violence and substance abuse, and higher rates of graduation 
     and enrollment in postsecondary education.
       (6) Numerous education laws now require meaningful parental 
     involvement, including title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), the 
     Goals 2000: Educate America Act (20 U.S.C. 5801 et seq.), the 
     Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), and the Individuals 
     with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), and 
     elements of these laws should be extended to other Federal 
     education programs.

     SEC. 4. BASIC PROGRAMS.

       (a) State Plan.--Section 1111 (20 U.S.C. 6311) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(2)(B)(ii), by striking ``other 
     measures'' and inserting ``academic achievement and other 
     measures, such as a school or local educational agency's 
     responsibilities under sections 1118 and 1119'';
       (2) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by inserting before the 
     semicolon the following: ``, and parental involvement under 
     section 1118'';
       (3) by redesignating subsections (d) through (g) as 
     subsections (e) through (h), respectively; and
       (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Parental Involvement.--Each State plan shall 
     demonstrate that the State has identified or developed 
     effective research-based best practices designed to foster 
     meaningful parental involvement. Such best practices shall--
       ``(1) be disseminated to all schools and local educational 
     agencies in the State;
       ``(2) be implemented in all schools in the State; and
       ``(3) address the full range of parental involvement 
     activities required under section 1118.''.
       (b) Local Educational Agency Plans.--Section 1112 (20 
     U.S.C. 6312) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(1)--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) through (H) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (I); and
       (B) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
       ``(D) work in consultation with schools as the schools 
     develop and implement their plans or activities under 
     sections 1118 and 1119;''; and
       (2) in subsection (e)(3), by inserting before the period 
     the following: ``and if such agency's parental involvement 
     activities are in accordance with section 1118''.
       (c) Schoolwide Programs.--Section 1114 (20 U.S.C. 6314) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1)(E), by inserting after 
     ``involvement'' the following: ``in accordance with section 
     1118''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(2)(A)(iv), by inserting after 
     ``results'' the following: ``in a language the family can 
     understand''.
       (d) Targeted Assistance.--Section 1115(c)(1)(H) (20 U.S.C. 
     6315(c)(1)(H)) is amended by inserting after ``involvement'' 
     the following: ``in accordance with section 1118''.
       (e) Assessments.--Section 1116 (20 U.S.C. 6317) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs 
     (4) and (5), respectively;
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) review the effectiveness of the actions and 
     activities the schools are carrying out under this part with 
     respect to parental involvement, professional development, 
     and other activities assisted under this Act;''; and
       (C) in paragraph (4) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (3))--
       (i) by inserting ``of yearly progress'' after ``annual 
     review''; and
       (ii) by striking ``of all'' and inserting ``and the review 
     conducted under paragraph (3), with respect to all'';
       (2) in subsection (c)(4), by inserting after ``elements of 
     student performance problems'' the following: ``, that 
     addresses school problems, if any, in implementing the 
     parental involvement requirements in section 1118 and the 
     professional development requirements in section 1119,''; and
       (3) in subsection (d)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) annually review the effectiveness of the action or 
     activities carried out under this part by each local 
     educational agency receiving funds under this part with 
     respect to parental involvement, professional development, 
     and other activities assisted under this Act; and''; and
       (D) in subparagraph (C) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B))--
       (i) by inserting ``of yearly progress'' after ``State 
     review''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``, and of the review conducted under 
     subparagraph (B)'' after ``1111(b)(3)(I)''.
       (f) State Assistance.--Section 1117 (20 U.S.C. 6318) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), by inserting ``parental 
     involvement,'' after ``including''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(C)--
       (i) by inserting ``parents,'' after ``including''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``parental involvement programs,'' after 
     ``successful''; and
       (B) by inserting at the end the following:
       ``(4) Parental involvement.--Each State shall collect and 
     disseminate effective parental involvement practices to local 
     educational agencies and schools. Such practices shall--
       ``(A) be based on the most current research on effective 
     parental involvement that fosters achievement to high 
     standards for all children;
       ``(B) be geared toward lowering barriers to greater 
     participation in school planning, review, and improvement 
     experienced by parents; and
       ``(C) be implemented by the State in local educational 
     agencies and schools requesting such assistance from the 
     State.''.
       (g) Parental Involvement.--Section 1118 (20 U.S.C. 6319) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(B), by inserting before the 
     semicolon the following: ``activities that will lead to 
     improved student achievement for all students'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting before the last 
     sentence the following: ``Parents shall be notified of the 
     policy in their own language.'';
       (3) in subsection (e)(1), by striking ``participating 
     parents'' and inserting ``all parents of children served by 
     the school or agency, as appropriate,'';
       (4) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``Such local educational agencies and schools may use 
     information, technical assistance, and other support from the 
     parental information and resource centers to create parent 
     resource centers in schools.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) State Review.--The State educational agency shall 
     review the local educational agency's parental involvement 
     policies and practices to determine if such policies and 
     practices are meaningful and targeted to improve home and 
     school communication, student achievement, and parental 
     involvement in school planning, review, and improvement.''.

[[Page 19966]]



     SEC. 5. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) Purposes.--Section 2002(2) (20 U.S.C. 6602(2)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in subparagraph (F), by striking the period and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(G) incorporates training in effective practices in order 
     to encourage and offer opportunities to get parents involved 
     in their child's education in ways that will foster student 
     achievement and well-being; and
       ``(H) includes special training for teachers and 
     administrators to develop the skills necessary to work most 
     effectively with parents.''.
       (b) Authorized Activities.--Section 2102(c) (20 U.S.C. 
     6622(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (13), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (14), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(15) the development and dissemination of model programs 
     that teach teachers and administrators how best to work with 
     parents and how to encourage the parent's involvement in the 
     full range of parental involvement activities described in 
     section 1118.''.
       (c) State Applications.--Section 2205(b)(2) (20 U.S.C. 
     6645(b)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (N), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (O) as subparagraph (P); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (N) the following:
       ``(O) describe how the State will train teachers to foster 
     relationships with parents and encourage parents to become 
     collaborators with schools in their children's education; 
     and''.
       (d) State-Level Activities.--Section 2207 (20 U.S.C. 6647) 
     is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (12) and (13) as (13) and 
     (14), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (11) the following:
       ``(12) providing professional development programs that 
     enable teachers, administrators, and pupil services personnel 
     to effectively communicate with and involve parents in the 
     education process to support school planning, review, 
     improvement, and classroom instruction, and to work 
     effectively with parent volunteers;''.
       (e) Local Plan and Application for Improving Teaching and 
     Learning.--Section 2208 (20 U.S.C. 6648) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2), by inserting ``parents,'' after 
     ``administrators,''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)(1)--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (I) and (J) as 
     subparagraphs (J) and (K), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after subparagraph (H) the following:
       ``(I) describe the specific professional development 
     strategies that will be implemented to improve parental 
     involvement in education and how such agency will be held 
     accountable for implementing such strategies.''.
       (f) Local Allocation.--Section 2210(b)(3) (20 U.S.C. 
     6650(b)(3)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (P) and (Q) as 
     subparagraphs (Q) and (R), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (O) the following:
       ``(P) professional development activities designed to 
     enable teachers, administrators, and pupil services personnel 
     to communicate with parents regarding student achievement on 
     assessments.''.

     SEC. 6. TECHNOLOGY FOR EDUCATION.

       (a) Findings.--Section 3111 (20 U.S.C. 6811) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``and by facilitating 
     mentor relationships,'' after ``by means of 
     telecommunications,'';
       (2) in paragraph (14), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (3) in paragraph (15), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(16) access to education technology and teachers trained 
     in how to incorporate the technology into their instruction 
     leads to improved student achievement, motivation, and school 
     attendance;
       ``(17) the use of technology in education can enhance the 
     educational opportunities schools can offer students with 
     special needs; and
       ``(18) the introduction of education technology increases 
     parental involvement, which has been shown to improve student 
     achievement.''.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--Section 3112 (20 U.S.C. 6812) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (11), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (12), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding after paragraph (12), the following:
       ``(13) development and support for technology and 
     technology programming that will enhance and facilitate 
     meaningful parental involvement.''.
       (c) National Long-Range Technology Plan.--Section 
     3121(c)(4) (20 U.S.C. 6831(c)(4)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(G) increased parental involvement in schools through the 
     use of technology;''.
       (d) Federal Leadership.--Section 3122(c) (20 U.S.C. 
     6832(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (15), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (16), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(17) the development, demonstration, and evaluation of 
     model technology programs designed to improve parental 
     involvement.''.
       (e) Local Uses of Funds.--Section 3134 (20 U.S.C. 6844) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) utilizing technology to develop or expand efforts to 
     connect schools and teachers with parents to promote 
     meaningful parental involvement and foster increased 
     communication about curriculum, assignments, and assessments; 
     and
       ``(8) providing ongoing training and support for parents to 
     help the parents learn and use the technology being applied 
     in their children's education, so as to equip the parents to 
     reinforce and support their children's learning.''.
       (f) Local Applications.--Section 3135 (20 U.S.C. 6845) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(D)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (B) in clause (ii), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) a description of how parents will be informed of, 
     and trained in, the use of technologies, so that the parents 
     will be equipped to reinforce at home the instruction their 
     children receive at school;'';
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) improve parental involvement in schools;'';
       (3) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) describe how the local educational agency will 
     effectively use technology to promote parental involvement 
     and increase communication with parents.''.
       (g) National Challenge Grants.--Section 3136(c) (20 U.S.C. 
     6846(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) the project will enhance parental involvement by 
     providing parents the means and the skills needed to more 
     fully participate in their child's learning.''.

     SEC. 7. DRUG-FREE SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES.

       (a) State Applications.--Section 4112 (20 U.S.C. 7112) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, including how the 
     agency will receive input from parents regarding the use of 
     such funds'' after ``4113(b)''; and
       (B) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``, and how such review 
     will include input from parents'' after ``4115''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (6), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) a specific description of how input from parents will 
     be sought regarding the use of funds under section 
     4114(a).''.
       (b) Evaluation and Reporting.--Section 4117 (20 U.S.C. 
     7117) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) on the State's efforts to inform parents of and 
     include parents in violence and drug prevention efforts.''; 
     and
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (c), by striking 
     the period and inserting ``and a description of how parents 
     were informed of and participated in violence and drug 
     prevention efforts.''.

     SEC. 8. INNOVATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM STRATEGIES.

       (a) Definition.--Section 6003 (20 U.S.C. 7303) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``children, and (3)'' and inserting 
     ``children, (3) adopting meaningful parental involvement 
     policies and practices, and (4)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) A climate that promotes meaningful parental 
     involvement in the classroom and in site-based activities.''.
       (b) State Applications.--Section 6202(a) (20 U.S.C. 
     7332(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (7), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and

[[Page 19967]]

       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) provides information on the parental involvement 
     policies and practices promoted by the State.''.
       (c) Targeted Uses of Funds.--Section 6301(b) (20 U.S.C. 
     7351(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (8), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:
       ``(10) programs to promote the meaningful involvement of 
     parents.''.
       (d) Local Applications.--Section 6303(a)(1)(A) (20 U.S.C. 
     7353(a)(1)(A)) is amended by inserting ``, including parental 
     involvement,'' before ``designed''.

     SEC. 9. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

       (a) Definition.--Section 14101 (20 U.S.C. 8801) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (23) through (29) as 
     paragraphs (24) through (30), respectfully; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (22) the following:
       ``(23) Parental involvement.--The term `parental 
     involvement' means the participation of parents on all levels 
     of a school's operation, including all of the activities 
     described in section 1118.''.
       (b) Parental Involvement.--Title XIV (20 U.S.C. 8801 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

                     ``PART H--PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT

     ``SEC. 14901. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT.

       ``(a) State Parental Involvement Plan.--In order to receive 
     Federal funding for any program authorized under this Act, a 
     State educational agency shall (as part of a consolidated 
     application, or other State plan or application submitted 
     under this Act) submit to the Secretary--
       ``(1) a description of the agency's parental involvement 
     policies, consistent with section 1118, including specific 
     details about--
       ``(A) how Federal funds will be used to implement such 
     policies; and
       ``(B) successful research-based practices in schools 
     throughout the State; and
       ``(2) a description of how such policies will be evaluated 
     with respect to increased parental involvement in the schools 
     throughout the State.
       ``(b) Parental Review of State Parental Involvement Plan.--
     Prior to making the submission described in subsection (a), a 
     State educational agency shall involve parents in the 
     development of the policies described in such subsection by--
       ``(1) providing public notice of the policies in a manner 
     and language understandable to parents;
       ``(2) providing the opportunity for parents and other 
     interested individuals to comment on the policies; and
       ``(3) including the comments received with the submission.
       ``(c) Language Applicability.--Each State educational 
     agency and local educational agency that is required to 
     establish a parental involvement plan or policy under a 
     program assisted under this Act shall make available, to the 
     parents of children eligible to participate in the program, 
     the plan or policy in the language most familiar to the 
     parents and in an easily understandable manner.''.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I commend Senator Reed for introducing 
this important legislation. I am proud to co-sponsor this bill to 
ensure that parents have a stronger role in the education of their 
children.
  The first and most important teachers in children's lives are their 
parents. It is parents who help children begin learning about the 
world. It is parents who provide motivation and encouragement for 
academic success. And it is parents who provide indispensable lessons 
of character. The central role that parents play in the lives of their 
children requires strong parental involvement in education.
  Involving parents in education increases the achievement of all 
students. Research has repeatedly shown that a child with an involved 
parent is more likely to attend school regularly, is less likely to 
engage in violence or substance abuse, and will do better academically 
and on standardized tests. These fundamental principles apply without 
regard to the economic status or ethnic background of the parents.
  Parental involvement is also a vital part of a child's literacy. 
Children excel in reading when reading is a regular part of their early 
education. Students who have a greater array of reading material in the 
home have higher reading achievement.
  We know that increased parental involvement works. In Worcester, the 
Belmont Community School has instituted a school-wide reading 
initiative called ``Books and Beyond,'' which is helping children 
improve their reading skills and encourage their desire to read. Its 
success is largely due to special workshops and classes for parents, 
which emphasizes parental involvement, adult literacy training, and 
strong parent-school partnerships.
  The Hueco Elementary School in El Paso, Texas, supports parent 
involvement in a number of ways. It offers parenting classes throughout 
the year, including training for parents to support learning at home. 
It works to increase communication with parents through a Parent 
Communication Council that meets monthly. Hueco has also hired a 
successful parent coordinator to help teachers involve parents. This 
effort has paid off. Now parents have a strong role in the school. They 
participate in classroom instruction, and they are able to improve 
their own education. Average attendance has risen to 97 percent. 
Students whose parents attend workshops and participate in other 
activities have more success in school and fewer disciplinary problems.
  The federal government has a responsibility to be part of the effort 
to enhance parental involvement. The legislation we are introducing 
will help states and school districts to create strong ties with 
parents. It strengthens parental involvement programs in Title I, and 
encourages schools to use proven techniques for helping teachers and 
parents work together. It also provides support for connecting schools 
and parents through technology, and it increases the role of parents in 
the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities program.
  Strong parent involvement will help ensure strong schools. We should 
do all we can to make sure that federal support for improving public 
schools provides a strong role for parents. By doing so, we help create 
the brighter future that all the nation's children deserve.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 1558. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a tax credit for holders of Community Open Space bonds the proceeds of 
which are used for qualified environmental infrastructure projects, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


                 community open space bonds act of 1999

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Community 
Open Space Bonds Act of 1999 with my colleague, the senior Senator from 
Utah. This bill is designed to give state and local governments more 
resources to protect open space, preserve water quality, and redevelop 
brownfield sites. It provides communities with zero-cost financing 
options for those activities in an entirely voluntary and locally-
driven way. There is no Federal land-use planning involved.
  The demand for these kinds of community-protection and quality of 
life activities is plain to see. Open space ballot initiatives in last 
year's elections were hugely successful. States and local governments 
set aside nearly $7.5 billion over the next several years to deal with 
environmental issues raised by growth. Smart growth planning ideas are 
sweeping the nation. States are steering their investments to 
preserving open space and encouraging smarter development.
  These ideas are coming straight from state and local officials and 
community leaders. People are discussing how they want their 
communities to look and feel for the first time in decades. Last fall, 
a state-wide conference in my home state entitled ``Big Sky or Big 
Sprawl'' brought together Montanans from all over the state to exchange 
ideas on how to prepare for growth and keep our state ``the last best 
place.''
  This new attention to the impacts of growth is happening for many 
reasons. Some claim that transportation planning has not kept up with 
communities' needs for choices and access, causing congestion and lost 
productivity. Some say that building codes and subdivision regulations 
have encouraged the development of agricultural and open space areas at 
the expense of existing suburbs. Some maintain that the tax code drives 
development in outlying areas while urban and

[[Page 19968]]

downtown business districts fail. Others suggest that the Federal 
government's policies on location of post offices and Federal offices 
has pushed growth out of small and large cities alike.
  Whatever the cause, growth is exploding across the land. For 
instance, Los Angeles' land use grew by 300 percent between 1970 and 
1990, while population grew by only 45 percent. In the same period, 
Cleveland actually lost 11 percent of its population, but grew by 33 
percent in size.
  The problem is not growth per se, but the inefficient way that 
current growth is using today's infrastructure. Some cities like 
Bozeman, Montana, have had to resort to impact assessment fees in the 
outlying areas so that the established city's system would not have to 
subsidize growth away from the already built up areas. The challenge is 
to encourage growth while maintaining open space and other factors that 
make our communities desirable places to live and work.
  Because of our quality of life in the West, people are moving there 
in droves. We pride ourselves on having lots of space and we want 
growth.
  But, growth in environmentally sensitive and water restricted areas 
poses some unique problems. We have vast amounts of public land that 
are getting harder and harder to access as growth crowds these areas. 
That means fewer hunters, fishermen, hikers, and outdoor enthusiasts, 
can use these lands easily.
  One result of this growth is that the character of the West is 
changing rapidly. For instance, Montana grew faster than the rest of 
the nation in the 1990s. That rate of growth, especially when it is 
concentrated in a small number of areas, concerns people. They start 
turning to their state and local government representatives for action 
to preserve the character of their communities.
  A recent poll showed that most Americans believe that government at 
all levels could do a better job of protecting and creating parks and 
conserving open space. That same poll showed that they are willing to 
pay for such programs and that they view these programs as a relatively 
high priority. Leaders at all levels of government should heed these 
results.
  Mr. President, the bill we are introducing today is intended to help 
address this need. We want to give communities the flexible resources 
they need to creatively manage growth-related problems at the local 
level.
  In developing the Community Open Space Bonds Act of 1999, we started 
with the proposal included in the Administration's FY2000 budget 
request. We have improved upon it to make it more responsive to local 
needs and to be equitable in its treatment of small and Western 
communities.
  However, the basic idea is still the same. States and local 
governments, including tribal governments, can compete for the 
authority to issue bonds on which the Federal government will pay the 
interest costs. The proceeds from the sale of the bonds can be used to 
acquire open space, build parks, protect water quality, improve access 
to public lands and redevelop brownfield areas. Up to $1.9 billion in 
bonding authority could be issued over each of the next five years. The 
Federal government would pay the interest costs by giving bondholders a 
tax credit against their income at the corporate AA credit rate.
  Rather than having Federal agencies making all the decisions about 
who gets bonding authority, we are establishing a Community Open Space 
Bonds Board. This Board will be dominated by non-Federal interest, such 
as Governors, County Commissioners, Mayors, etc. and will be given 
specific guidance to use in developing application criteria. This 
guidance will stress the need for an equitable distribution of bonding 
authority to all regions of the country and to all sizes of communities 
and for all the different qualifying purposes. We have also guaranteed 
that each state or a community in such a state will get at least one 
allocation of bonding authority per year.
  We think these modifications improve the original proposal and are 
worthy of support by our colleagues from both sides of the aisle. We 
stand ready to work with them to address their concerns and get this 
bill enacted.
  Mr. President, local governments across the country are looking for 
new and low-cost ways to maintain and preserve the quality of life in 
their area. Community Open Space Bonds are a great opportunity for all 
our citizens to improve the long term health and economic viability of 
our communities. I am hopeful we can pursue this opportunity in a 
bipartisan and constructive way.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1558

       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 ``Community Open Space Bonds 
     Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR HOLDERS OF COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE BONDS.

       (a) In General.--Part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credits 
     against tax) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subpart:

 ``Subpart H--Nonrefundable Credit for Holders of Community Open Space 
                                 Bonds

``Sec. 54. Credit to holders of Community Open Space bonds.

     ``SEC. 54. CREDIT TO HOLDERS OF COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE BONDS.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of a taxpayer who 
     holds a Community Open Space bond on a credit allowance date 
     which occurs during the taxable year, there shall be allowed 
     as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for such 
     taxable year an amount equal to the sum of the credits 
     determined under subsection (b) with respect to credit 
     allowance dates during such year on which the taxpayer holds 
     such bonds.
       ``(b) Amount of Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--The amount of the credit determined 
     under this subsection with respect to any credit allowance 
     date for a Community Open Space bond is an amount equal to 
     the product of--
       ``(A) the credit rate determined by the Secretary under 
     paragraph (2), multiplied by
       ``(B) the face amount of the bond held by the taxpayer on 
     the credit allowance date.
       ``(2) Determination.--During each calendar month, the 
     Secretary shall determine a credit rate which shall apply to 
     bonds issued during the following calendar month. The credit 
     rate for any 3-month period ending on a credit allowance date 
     is the percentage which the Secretary estimates will on 
     average equal the yield on corporate bonds outstanding on the 
     day before the date of such determination.
       ``(3) Special rule for issuance and redemption.--In the 
     case of a bond which is issued during the 3-month period 
     ending on a credit allowance date, the amount of the credit 
     determined under this subsection with respect to such credit 
     allowance date shall be a ratable portion of the credit 
     otherwise determined based on the portion of the 3-month 
     period during which the bond is outstanding. A similar rule 
     shall apply when the bond is redeemed.
       ``(c) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax.--
       ``(1) In general.--The credit allowed under subsection (a) 
     for any taxable year shall not exceed the excess of--
       ``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in 
     section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
       ``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under this part 
     (other than this subpart and subpart C).
       ``(2) Carryforward of unused credit.--If the credit 
     allowable under subsection (a) exceeds the limitation imposed 
     by paragraph (1) for such taxable year, such excess shall be 
     carried to each of the 5 taxable years following the unused 
     credit year and added to the credit allowable under 
     subsection (a) for each such taxable year, subject to the 
     application of paragraph (1) to such taxable year.
       ``(d) Community Open Space Bond.--For purposes of this 
     section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `Community Open Space bond' 
     means any bond issued as part of an issue if--
       ``(A) 95 percent or more of the proceeds of such issue are 
     to be used for a qualified environmental infrastructure 
     project,
       ``(B) the bond is issued by a State or local government,
       ``(C) the issuer--
       ``(i) designates such bond for purposes of this section,
       ``(ii) has a reasonable expectation that at least 10 
     percent of the proceeds of such issue will be spent for 
     qualifying environmental infrastructure projects within 6 
     months of the date such bonds are issued,
       ``(iii) certifies such proceeds will be used with due 
     diligence for qualified environmental infrastructure 
     projects, and

[[Page 19969]]

       ``(iv) has a reasonable expectation that any property 
     acquired or improved in connection with the proceeds of such 
     issue, other than property improved in connection with a 
     qualified environmental infrastructure project described in 
     paragraph (2)(A)(v), shall continue to be dedicated to a 
     qualified use for a period of not less than 15 years from the 
     date of such issue,
       ``(D) such bond satisfies public approval requirements 
     similar to the requirements of section 147(f)(2),
       ``(E) except as provided in paragraph (4)(B), the payment 
     of the principal of such issue is secured by taxes of general 
     applicability imposed by a general purpose governmental unit, 
     and
       ``(F) the term of each bond which is part of such issue 
     does not exceed 15 years.
       ``(2) Qualified environmental infrastructure project.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified environmental 
     infrastructure project' means--
       ``(i) acquisition of qualified property for use as open 
     space, wetlands, public parks, or greenways, or to improve 
     access to public lands by non-motorized means,
       ``(ii) construction, rehabilitation, or repair of a visitor 
     facility in connection with qualified property, including 
     nature centers, campgrounds, and hiking or biking trails,
       ``(iii) remediation of qualified property to enhance water 
     quality by--

       ``(I) restoring natural hydrology or planting trees and 
     streamside vegetation,
       ``(II) controlling erosion,
       ``(III) restoring wetlands, or
       ``(IV) treating conditions caused by the prior disposal of 
     toxic or other waste,

       ``(iv) acquisition of a qualified easement in order to 
     maintain the use and character of the property in connection 
     to which such easement is granted as open space, including an 
     easement to allow access to public land by non-motorized 
     means, and
       ``(v) environmental assessment and remediation of real 
     property and public infrastructure owned by a governmental 
     unit and located in an area where or on which there has been 
     a release (or threat of release) or disposal of any hazardous 
     substance (within the meaning of section 198), but not 
     including any property described in subparagraph (D).
       ``(B) Qualified property.--The term `qualified property' 
     means real property--
       ``(i) which is, or is to be, owned by--

       ``(I) a governmental unit, or
       ``(II) an organization described in section 501(c)(3) and 
     exempt from taxation under section 501(a) and which has as 
     one if its purposes environmental preservation, and

       ``(ii) which is reasonably anticipated to be available for 
     use by members of the general public, unless such use would 
     change the character of the property and be contrary to the 
     qualified use of the property.
       ``(C) Safe harbor for management contracts.--For purposes 
     of subparagraph (B), property shall not be treated as 
     qualified property if any rights or benefits of such property 
     inure to a private person other than rights or benefits under 
     a management contract or similar type of operating agreement 
     to which rules similar to the rules applicable to tax-exempt 
     bonds apply.
       ``(D) Cercla property.--Property is described in this 
     subparagraph if any portion of such property is included, or 
     proposed to be included, in the national priorities list 
     under section 105(a)(8)(B) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9605(a)(8)(B)).
       ``(E) Limit on disposition of property.--Any disposition of 
     any interest in property acquired or improved in connection 
     with a qualified environmental project described in this 
     paragraph (except a project described in subparagraph (A)(v)) 
     shall contain an option (recorded pursuant to applicable 
     State or local law) to purchase such property for an amount 
     equal to the original acquisition price of such property for 
     any interested organizations described in subparagraph 
     (B)(i)(II) if such organization purchases such property 
     subject to a restrictive covenant requiring a continued 
     qualified use of such property.
       ``(3) Temporary period exception.--
       ``(A) In general.--A bond shall not be treated as failing 
     to meet the requirement of paragraph (1)(A) solely by reason 
     of the fact that the proceeds of the issue of which such bond 
     is a part--
       ``(i) are invested for a reasonable temporary period (but 
     not more than 36 months) until such proceeds are needed for 
     the purpose for which such issue was issued, or
       ``(ii) are used within 90 days of the close of such 
     temporary period to redeem bonds which are a part of such 
     issue.
     Any earnings on such proceeds during the period under clause 
     (i) shall be treated as proceeds of the issue for purposes of 
     applying paragraph (1)(A).
       ``(B) Investment of proceeds.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), proceeds shall only be invested in--
       ``(i) Government securities, and
       ``(ii) in the case of a sinking fund established by the 
     issuer, State and local government securities issued by the 
     Treasury.
       ``(4) Special rules for projects described in paragraph 
     (2)(A)(v).--
       ``(A) Limit on use of proceeds for project.--This 
     subsection shall not apply to any bond issued as part of an 
     issue if an amount of the proceeds from such issue are used 
     for a qualified environmental infrastructure project 
     described in paragraph (2)(A)(v) and involving public 
     infrastructure in excess of an amount equal to 5 percent of 
     the total amount of such proceeds used for all projects 
     described in such paragraph (2)(A)(v).
       ``(B) Private use and repayment of proceeds.--In the case 
     of proceeds of an issue which are used for a qualified 
     environmental infrastructure project described in paragraph 
     (2)(A)(v), the issue of which such bonds are a part shall not 
     fail to meet the requirements of this subsection solely 
     because the proceeds of a disposition of any interest in such 
     property are used to redeem such bonds as long as the 
     purchaser of such property makes an irrevocable election not 
     to claim any deduction with respect to such project under 
     section 198.
       ``(5) Recapture of credit amount.--
       ``(A) In general.--If, during the taxable year, any bond 
     that is part of an issue under this section fails to meet the 
     requirements of this subsection--
       ``(i) such bond shall not be treated as a Community Open 
     Space bond for such taxable year and any succeeding taxable 
     year, and
       ``(ii) the issuer of such bond shall be liable for payment 
     to the United States of the credit recapture amount.
     Such payment shall be made at such time and in such manner as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       ``(B) Credit recapture amount.--For purposes of 
     subparagraph (A), the credit recapture amount is an amount 
     equal to the sum of--
       ``(i) the aggregate amount of credit allowed with respect 
     to such bond for the 3 preceding taxable years, plus
       ``(ii) interest (at the underpayment rate established under 
     section 6621) on the credit amount from the date such credit 
     was allowed to the payment date under subparagraph (A).
       ``(e) Limitations on Amount of Bonds Designated.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is a Community Open Space bond 
     limitation for each calendar year equal to--
       ``(A) $1,900,000,000 for each of years 2000 through 2004, 
     and
       ``(B) except as provided in paragraph (3), zero after 2004.
       ``(2) Allocation of limitation among states and local 
     governments.--
       ``(A) In general.--The limitation amount to be allocated 
     under paragraph (1) for any calendar year shall be allocated 
     among States and local governments with an approved 
     application on a competitive basis by the Community Open 
     Space Bonds Board (referred to in this subsection as the 
     `Board') established under section 3 of the Community Open 
     Space Bonds Act of 1999.
       ``(B) Approved application.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), the term `approved application' means an application 
     which is approved by the Board, and which includes such 
     information as the Board requires.
       ``(C) Allocation to each state.--The Board shall, in 
     accordance with the criteria for approval of applications, 
     allocate amounts in any calendar year to at least 1 approved 
     application from each State, or local government of such 
     State, which submits such application.
       ``(3) Carryover of unused limitation.--If for any calendar 
     year--
       ``(A) the limitation amount under paragraph (1), exceeds
       ``(B) the aggregate limitation amount allocated to States 
     and local governments under this section,
     the limitation amount under paragraph (1) for the following 
     calendar year shall be increased by the amount of such 
     excess. No limitation amount shall be carried forward under 
     this paragraph more than 3 years.
       ``(f) Other Definitions; Special Rules.--For purposes of 
     this subpart--
       ``(1) Bond.--The term `bond' includes any obligation.
       ``(2) Credit allowance date.--The term `credit allowance 
     date' means--
       ``(A) March 15,
       ``(B) June 15,
       ``(C) September 15, and
       ``(D) December 15.
     Such term includes the last day on which the bond is 
     outstanding.
       ``(3) Qualified easement.--The term `qualified easement' 
     means a perpetual easement--
       ``(A) which would be a qualified conservation contribution 
     under section 170(h) if such easement were a contribution 
     under such section, and
       ``(B) which is to be held by an entity described in 
     subclause (I) or (II) of subsection (d)(2)(B)(i).
       ``(4) Qualified use.--The term `qualified use' means, with 
     respect to property, a use which is consistent with the 
     purpose of the qualified environmental infrastructure project 
     related to such property.
       ``(5) State.--The term `State' includes the District of 
     Columbia, any possession of the United States, and any Indian 
     tribe (as defined in section 45A(c)(6)).
       ``(6) Partnership; S corporation; and other pass-thru 
     entities.--Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, in 
     the case of a partnership, trust, S corporation, or

[[Page 19970]]

     other pass-thru entity, rules similar to the rules of section 
     41(g) shall apply with respect to the credit allowable under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(g) Credit Included in Gross Income.--Gross income 
     includes the amount of the credit allowed to the taxpayer 
     under this section and the amount so included shall be 
     treated as interest income.
       ``(h) Bonds Held By Regulated Investment Companies.--If any 
     Community Open Space bond is held by a regulated investment 
     company, the credit determined under subsection (a) shall be 
     allowed to shareholders of such company under procedures 
     prescribed by the Secretary.
       ``(i) Credits May Be Stripped.--Under regulations 
     prescribed by the Secretary--
       ``(1) In general.--There may be a separation (including at 
     issuance) of the ownership of a Community Open Space bond and 
     the entitlement to the credit under this section with respect 
     to such bond. In case of any such separation, the credit 
     under this section shall be allowed to the person which, on 
     the credit allowance date, holds the instrument evidencing 
     the entitlement to the credit and not to the holder of the 
     bond.
       ``(2) Certain rules to apply.--In the case of a separation 
     described in paragraph (1), the rules of section 1286 shall 
     apply to the Community Open Space bond as if it were a 
     stripped bond and to the credit under this section as if it 
     were a stripped coupon.
       ``(j) Treatment for Estimated Tax Purposes.--Solely for 
     purposes of sections 6654 and 6655, the credit allowed by 
     this section to a taxpayer by reason of holding a Community 
     Open Space bond on a credit allowance date shall be treated 
     as if it were a payment of estimated tax made by the taxpayer 
     on such date.
       ``(k) Credit May Be Transferred.--Nothing in any law or 
     rule of law shall be construed to limit the transferability 
     of the credit allowed by this section through sale and 
     repurchase agreements.
       ``(l) Reporting.--Issuers of Community Open Space bonds 
     shall submit reports similar to the reports required under 
     section 149(e).''
       (b) Reporting.--Subsection (d) of section 6049 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to returns regarding 
     payments of interest) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(8) Reporting of Credit on Community Open Space Bonds.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the term 
     `interest' includes amounts includible in gross income under 
     section 54(f) and such amounts shall be treated as paid on 
     the credit allowance date (as defined in section 54(f)(2)).
       ``(B) Reporting to corporations, etc.--Except as otherwise 
     provided in regulations, in the case of any interest 
     described in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, subsection 
     (b)(4) of this section shall be applied without regard to 
     subparagraphs (A), (H), (I), (J), (K), and (L)(i).
       ``(C) Regulatory authority.--The Secretary may prescribe 
     such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to carry out 
     the purposes of this paragraph, including regulations which 
     require more frequent or more detailed reporting.''
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) The table of subparts for part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

``Subpart H. Nonrefundable Credit for Holders of Community Open Space 
              Bonds.''

       (2) Section 6401(b)(1) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``and G'' and inserting ``G, and H''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to obligations issued after December 31, 1999.

     SEC. 3. COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE BONDS BOARD.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established in the Executive 
     Branch a board to be known as the Community Open Space Bonds 
     Board (in this section referred to as the ``Board'').
       (b) Membership.--
       (1) Composition.--The Board shall be composed of 18 
     members, as follows:
       (A) 3 members shall be individuals who are not otherwise 
     Federal officers or employees and who are appointed by the 
     President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
       (B) 8 members, not be affiliated with the same political 
     party, shall be individuals who represent Governors, or other 
     chief executive officers, of a State, mayors, and county 
     commissioners and who are appointed by the President, by and 
     with the advice and consent of the Senate.
       (C) 1 member shall be the Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency or the Administrator's 
     designee.
       (D) 1 member shall be the Secretary of Agriculture or the 
     Secretary's designee.
       (E) 1 member shall be the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development or the Secretary's designee.
       (F) 1 member shall be the Secretary of Interior or the 
     Secretary's designee.
       (G) 1 member shall be the Secretary of Transportation or 
     the Secretary's designee.
       (H) 1 member shall be the Secretary of the Treasury or the 
     Secretary's designee.
       (I) 1 member shall be the Director of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency or the Director's designee.
       (2) Qualifications and terms.--
       (A) Qualifications.--Members of the Board described in 
     paragraph (1)(A) shall be appointed without regard to 
     political affiliation and solely on the basis of their 
     professional experience and expertise in 1 or more of the 
     following areas:
       (i) Tax-exempt organizations which have as a principal 
     purpose environmental protection and land conservation.
       (ii) Community planning.
       (iii) Real estate investment and bond financing.

     In the aggregate, the members of the Board described in 
     paragraph (1)(A) should collectively bring to bear expertise 
     in all of the areas described in the preceding sentence and 
     should represent each position contained in such paragraph 
     and different regions of the country.
       (B) Terms.--Each member who is described in subparagraph 
     (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) shall be appointed for a term of 
     3 years, except that of the members first appointed--
       (i) 3 member shall be appointed for a term of 1 year,
       (ii) 4 members shall be appointed for a term of 2 years, 
     and
       (iii) 4 members shall be appointed for a term of 3 years.
       (C) Reappointment.--An individual who is described in 
     subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) may be appointed to 
     no more than one 3-year term on the Board.
       (D) Vacancy.--Any vacancy on the Board shall be filled in 
     the same manner as the original appointment. Any member 
     appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the expiration 
     of the term for which the member's predecessor was appointed 
     shall be appointed for the remainder of that term.
       (3) Initial meeting.--Not later than 30 days after the date 
     on which all members of the Board have been appointed, the 
     Board shall hold its first meeting. Subsequent meetings shall 
     be determined by the Board by majority vote or held at the 
     call of the Chairperson.
       (4) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Board shall 
     constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may hold 
     hearings.
       (5) Chairperson.--The member described in paragraph (1)(C) 
     shall serve as the Chairperson of the Board.
       (6) Removal.--
       (A) In general.--Any member of the Board appointed under 
     subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) may be removed at 
     the will of the President.
       (B) Secretaries; director; administrator.--An individual 
     described in subparagraphs (C) through (I) of paragraph (1) 
     shall be removed upon termination of service in the office 
     described in each such subparagraph.
       (c) Duties of the Board.--
       (1) In general.--The Board shall review applications for 
     allocation of the Community Open Space bond limitation 
     amounts under section 54(e)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 and approve applications in accordance with published 
     criteria.
       (2) Criteria for approval.--The Board shall promulgate a 
     regulation to develop criteria for approval of applications 
     under paragraph (1), taking into consideration the following 
     guidelines:
       (A) A distribution pattern of the overall limitation amount 
     available for the year which results in the financing of each 
     category of qualified environmental infrastructure project 
     and results in an even distribution among different regions 
     of the country and sizes of communities.
       (B) State or local government support of proposed projects.
       (C) Proposed projects which meet local and regional 
     environmental protection or planning goals and leverage or 
     make more efficient or innovative the use of other public or 
     private resources.
       (D) Proposed projects which are intended to maintain the 
     viability of existing central business districts, preserve 
     the community's distinct character and values, and encourage 
     the reuse of property already served by public 
     infrastructure.
       (E) The extent of expected improvement in environmental 
     quality, outdoor recreation opportunities, and access to 
     public lands.
       (3) Annual report.--The Board shall annually report with 
     respect to the conduct of its responsibilities under this 
     section to the President and Congress and such report shall 
     include--
       (A) the overall progress of the Community Open Space bond 
     program, and
       (B) the overall limitation amount allocated during the year 
     and a description of the amount, region, and qualified 
     environmental infrastructure project financed by each 
     allocation.
       (4) Conflict of interest.--The Board shall carry out its 
     duties under this subsection in such a way to ensure that all 
     conflicts of interest of its members are avoided.
       (d) Powers of the Board.--
       (1) Hearings.--The Board may hold such hearings, sit and 
     act at such times and places, take such testimony, and 
     receive such evidence as the Board considers advisable to 
     carry out the purposes of this section.
       (2) Information from federal agencies.--The Board may 
     secure directly from any

[[Page 19971]]

     Federal department or agency such information as the Board 
     considers necessary to carry out the provisions of this 
     section, including the published and unpublished data and 
     analytical products of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Upon 
     request of the Chairperson of the Board, the head of such 
     department or agency shall furnish such information to the 
     Board.
       (3) Postal services.--The Board may use the United States 
     mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as 
     other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       (e) Board Personnel Matters.--
       (1) Compensation of members.--Each member of the Board who 
     is not otherwise an officer or employee of the Federal 
     Government shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily 
     equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for 
     level III of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of 
     title 5, United States Code, for each day (including travel 
     time) during which such member is engaged in the performance 
     of the duties of the Board. All members of the Board who 
     otherwise are officers or employees of the United States 
     shall serve without compensation in addition to that received 
     for their services as officers or employees of the United 
     States.
       (2) Travel expenses.--The members of the Board shall be 
     allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies 
     under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States 
     Code, while away from their homes or regular places of 
     business in the performance of services for the Board.
       (3) Staff.--
       (A) In general.--The Chairperson of the Board may, without 
     regard to the civil service laws and regulations, appoint and 
     terminate an executive director and such other additional 
     personnel as may be necessary to enable the Board to perform 
     its duties. The employment of an executive director shall be 
     subject to confirmation by the Board.
       (B) Compensation.--The Chairperson of the Board may fix the 
     compensation of the executive director and other personnel 
     without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter 
     III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to 
     classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates, 
     except that the rate of pay for the executive director and 
     other personnel may not exceed the rate payable for level IV 
     of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title.
       (4) Detail of government employees.--Any Federal Government 
     employee may be detailed to the Board without additional 
     reimbursement (other than the employee's regular 
     compensation), and such detail shall be without interruption 
     or loss of civil service status or privilege.
       (5) Procurement of temporary and intermittent services.--
     The Chairperson of the Board may procure temporary and 
     intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, 
     United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not 
     exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay 
     prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under 
     section 5316 of such title.
       (f) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) State.--The term `State' includes the District of 
     Columbia, any possession of the United States, and any Indian 
     tribe (as defined in section 45A(c)(6)).
       (2) Qualified environmental infrastructure project.--The 
     term `qualified environmental infrastructure project' has the 
     same meaning given that term in section 54(d)(2) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Board such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out the purposes of this section.
       (h) Effective Dates.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Initial nominations.--The President shall submit the 
     initial nominations under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
     subsection (b)(1) to the Senate not later than 90 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (3) Regulations.--Not later than January 1, 2000, the Board 
     shall publish in the Federal Register the guidelines and 
     criteria for submission and approval of applications under 
     subsection (c).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LAUTENBERG:
  S. 1559. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to enhance the 
safety of motor carrier operations and the Nation's highway system, 
including highway-rail crossings, by amending existing safety laws to 
strengthen commercial driver licensing, to improve compliance, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


                    motor carrier safety act of 1999

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to 
save lives on our highways the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1999.
  Every year over 5000 people die due to truck and bus accidents. Since 
1992, violent truck crash fatalities have increased more than 18 
percent. Large trucks are only three percent of the total national 
vehicle fleet--but 22 percent of all passenger vehicle deaths in 
multiple-vehicle crashes involve trucks.
  Whether we share the road with a truck or ride on an interstate bus, 
Americans need to be sure their nation's roads are safe.
  Last December in New Jersey, three intercity buses crashed in five 
days. That accident rate is unacceptable. We can and must prevent these 
accidents with stronger oversight of commercial drivers' licenses and 
the carriers that operate both bus and truck companies.
  Mr. President, my legislation addresses our commercial vehicle death 
epidemic with a multi-faceted approach to combating this problem.
  First, my legislation institutes a strong Commercial Driver's License 
(CDL) program. All convictions for moving violations, whether in a 
commercial vehicle or not, are put on the truck or bus drivers' record. 
A new applicant must have a alcohol and drug free driving record for 3 
years before receiving a CDL. All new drivers would be required to have 
in-vehicle training. It would authorize up to a 5 percent transfer of 
state's Federal highway funds to motor carrier safety programs if a 
state does not institute the new CDL program.
  Second, the legislation focuses on the carriers. All new carriers are 
required to have training on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
regulations before they receive authority to operate. To close unsafe 
carriers, they are required to submit information to target high-risk 
operations and the definition of a hazardous carrier is strengthened.
  Third, the installation of on-board recorders or other technologies 
to manage drivers' hours-of-service will be required.
  Fourth, the legislation supports improve data collection and research 
for safety issues including vehicle safety and driver performance, (2) 
improved crash data, and (3) driver compensation and safety.
  Fifth, the legislation funds grassroots safety campaigns to raise 
public awareness of the importance of motor carrier safety and 
discourage drivers from taking safety risks.
  Finally, the legislation has both incentives for the states to 
implement motor carrier safety improvements and rewards to the states 
who improve motor carrier safety fatalities by five percent of the 
previous year.
  Mr. President, we must do more to prevent unnecessary deaths caused 
by the lack of oversight of commercial vehicles.
  With this legislation, citizens will feel more secure about driving 
on our roads and highways.
  I hope that my colleagues will join me in support of this 
legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1559

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

                     TITLE I--MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY

     SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Motor Carrier Safety Act 
     of 1999''.

     SEC. 102. COMMERCIAL DRIVERS' LICENSES.

       (a) Driver's License Criteria.--Section 31305(a) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by--
       (1) striking ``and'' after the semicolon in paragraph (7);
       (2) redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (9); and
       (3) adding a new paragraph (8) after paragraph (7) as 
     follows:
       ``(8) shall ensure that an individual who operates or will 
     operate a commercial motor vehicle has received training, 
     including in-vehicle training, in the safe operation of a 
     motor vehicle of the type the individual operates or will 
     operate; and''.
       (b) Moving Traffic Violations.--Section 31311(a) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by--
       (1) redesignating paragraph (17) as paragraph (18); and
       (2) adding a new paragraph (17) after paragraph (16) as 
     follows:
       ``(17) The State shall record on a driver's commercial 
     driver's license record each conviction for a moving traffic 
     violation, including such a conviction for a violation 
     committed in a noncommercial motor vehicle.''.

[[Page 19972]]

       (c) Drug- or Alcohol-Related Violations.--Section 31311(a) 
     of title 49, United States Code, is further amended by adding 
     a new paragraph at the end as follows:
       ``(19) The State may not issue a commercial driver's 
     license to an individual within 3 years after the date the 
     individual was convicted of any drug- or alcohol-related 
     traffic violation, including a conviction for a violation 
     committed in a noncommercial motor vehicle.''.
       (d) Diversion or Special Licensing Programs.--Section 
     31311(a)(10) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding a new sentence at the end as follows: ``The State may 
     not issue a special license or permit to a commercial 
     driver's license holder that permits the driver to drive a 
     commercial motor vehicle during a period in which the 
     individual is disqualified from operating a commercial motor 
     vehicle or the individual's driver's license is revoked, 
     suspended, or canceled.''.
       (e) Transfer of Amounts for State Noncompliance.--(1) 
     Section 31314 of title 49, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 31314. Transfer of amounts for State noncompliance

       ``(a) In General.--On October 1, 2001, or as soon 
     thereafter as practicable, and each October 1 thereafter, if 
     a State has not complied substantially with all requirements 
     of section 31311(a) of this title, the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall transfer up to 5 percent of the amount 
     required to be apportioned to the State on that date under 
     each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) of 
     title 23 to the amount made available to the State to carry 
     out section 31102.
       ``(b) Transfer of Obligation Authority.--If the Secretary 
     transfers under this section any funds to the apportionment 
     to a State under section 31102 of this title for a fiscal 
     year, the Secretary shall transfer an equal amount of 
     obligation authority distributed for the fiscal year to the 
     State.
       ``(c) Limitation on Applicability of Obligation 
     Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     limitation on the total of obligations to carry out section 
     31102 of this title shall apply to funds transferred under 
     this section to the apportionment of a State under such 
     section.''.
       (2) Item 31314 in the analysis of chapter 313 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``31314. Transfer of amounts for State noncompliance.''.

     SEC. 103. SAFETY FITNESS OF OWNERS AND OPERATORS.

       Section 31144(b)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting the following before the period at the 
     end of that paragraph: ``, including a requirement that no 
     owner or operator that begins commercial motor vehicle 
     operations after the date of enactment of this section will 
     be determined to be fit unless such owner or operator has 
     attended a program for the education of owners and operators 
     that covers, at a minimum, safety, size and weight, and 
     financial responsibility regulations administered by the 
     Secretary. The Secretary shall assess a fee to defray the 
     cost of the program. The Secretary may use third parties to 
     provide the education program.''.

     SEC. 104. REDISTRIBUTION OF UNUSED FEDERAL-AID OBLIGATION 
                   AUTHORITY.

       Section 1102(d) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 
     21st Century (Public Law 105-178) is amended by inserting at 
     the end the following: ``, except that, beginning in fiscal 
     year 2001 through fiscal year 2003, no redistribution shall 
     be made to a State that fails to reduce the number of 
     fatalities in a year resulting from commercial motor vehicle 
     crashes by at least 5 percent, based on the most recent year 
     for which such data are available compared to the previous 
     year. For purposes of this section `commercial motor vehicle' 
     has the meaning specified in section 31301 of title 49, 
     United States Code.''.

     SEC. 105. ON-BOARD RECORDERS.

       (a) Federal Regulations.--The Secretary of Transportation, 
     after notice and opportunity for comment, shall issue 
     regulations requiring, as appropriate, the installation and 
     use of on-board recorders or other technologies on commercial 
     motor vehicles to manage the hours of service of drivers.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section ``commercial motor 
     vehicle'' has the meaning specified in section 31132 of title 
     49, United States Code.
       (c) Deadlines.--The regulations required under subsection 
     (a) of this section shall be developed pursuant to a 
     rulemaking proceeding initiated within 120 days after 
     enactment of this section and shall be issued not later than 
     2 years after the date of enactment.

     SEC. 106. DRIVER COMPENSATION AND SAFETY STUDY.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a 
     study to identify methods used to compensate drivers of 
     commercial motor vehicles, examine how different methods may 
     affect safety and compliance with Federal and State motor 
     carrier safety requirements, including hours of service 
     regulations, and identify ways safety could be improved 
     through changes in driver compensation. Such study should 
     include an examination of compensation incentives which could 
     improve safety and compliance with safety regulations.
       (b) Consultation.--In carrying out the study, the Secretary 
     shall consult with private and for-hire motor carriers, 
     independent owner operators, organized labor, drivers, safety 
     organizations, and State and local governments.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on the results of the study with any 
     recommendations the Secretary determines appropriate as a 
     result of the study.
       (d) Availability of Amounts.--$250,000 per fiscal year for 
     fiscal years 2001 through 2003 are made available from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for 
     the Secretary of Transportation to carry out this section.
       (e) Contract Authority; Date Available for Obligation.--The 
     amounts made available by this section from the Highway Trust 
     Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this 
     section shall be available for obligation on October 1, or as 
     soon thereafter as practicable, of the fiscal year for which 
     they are available for obligation.

     SEC. 107. PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION.

       The Secretary of Transportation shall expend from 
     administrative funds deducted under section 104(a) of title 
     23, United States Code, not more than $500,000 for each 
     fiscal year, beginning in fiscal year 2001, to carry out 
     public information and education programs to prevent crashes 
     involving commercial motor vehicles. The Secretary shall make 
     grants to at least 3 entities from among States, local 
     governments, law enforcement organizations, private sector 
     entities, nonprofit organizations, or commercial motor 
     vehicle driver organizations to develop and implement 
     programs to discourage drivers of commercial motor vehicles 
     and drivers of passenger vehicles and motor carriers from 
     taking safety risks. Such programs may be based on methods 
     used in other public safety campaigns to improve driver 
     performance.

     SEC. 108. PERIODIC REFILING OF MOTOR CARRIER IDENTIFICATION 
                   REPORTS.

       (a) Federal Regulations.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     shall amend section 385.21 of title 49, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, to require periodic updating of the Motor 
     Carrier Identification Report, Form MCS-150, by each motor 
     carrier conducting operations in interstate or foreign 
     commerce.
       (b) Availability of Amounts.--$5,500,000 per year, for 
     fiscal years 2001 through 2003, are made available from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to 
     the Secretary of Transportation to carry out this section.
       (c) Administrative Costs.--The Secretary may use, for the 
     administration of this section, amounts made available under 
     subsection (b) of this section for each of fiscal years 2001 
     through 2003.
       (d) Contract Authority; Date Available for Obligation.--The 
     amounts made available by this section from the Highway Trust 
     Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this 
     section shall be available for obligation on October 1, or as 
     soon thereafter as practicable, of the fiscal year for which 
     they are available for obligation.

     SEC. 109. AIDING AND ABETTING.

       (a) Chapter 5 of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting the following after section 526:

     ``Sec. 527. Aiding and abetting

       ``A person who knowingly aids, abets, counsels, commands, 
     induces, or procures a violation of a regulation or order 
     issued by the Secretary of Transportation under chapter 311 
     or section 31502 of this title shall be subject to civil and 
     criminal penalties under this chapter to the same extent as 
     the motor carrier or driver who commits a violation.''.
       (b) The analysis of chapter 5 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding the following at the end:

``527. Aiding and abetting.''.

     SEC. 110. IMMINENT HAZARD.

       Section 521(b)(5) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended by revising subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
       ``(B) In this paragraph `imminent hazard' means any 
     violation, or series of violations, of the statutes or 
     regulations specified in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph 
     that could result in a highway crash if not discontinued 
     within 24 hours.''.

     SEC. 111. INNOVATIVE TRAFFIC LAW PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a) Pilot Program.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     carry out a pilot program in cooperation with 1 or more 
     States to develop innovative methods of improving compliance 
     with traffic laws, including those pertaining to highway-rail 
     grade crossings. Such methods may include the use of 
     photography and other imaging technologies.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the start of the 
     pilot program, the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a 
     report on the results of the pilot program, together with any 
     recommendations as the Secretary determines appropriate.
       (c) Availability of Amounts.--$500,000 per year, for fiscal 
     years 2001 through 2003, are made available from the Highway 
     Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account)

[[Page 19973]]

     to the Secretary of Transportation to carry out this section.
       (d) Contract Authority; Date Available for Obligation.--The 
     amounts made available by this section from the Highway Trust 
     Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this 
     section shall be available for obligation on October 1, or as 
     soon thereafter as practicable, of the fiscal year for which 
     they are made available for obligation.

     SEC. 112. RESEARCH ON HEAVY VEHICLE SAFETY AND DRIVER 
                   PERFORMANCE.

       (a) Research on Heavy Vehicle Safety and Driver 
     Performance.--The Secretary, through the National Highway 
     Traffic Safety Administration, shall conduct research on 
     heavy vehicle safety, including measures to improve braking 
     and stability, measures to improve vehicle compatibility in 
     crashes between heavier and lighter vehicles, and measures to 
     improve the performance of motor vehicle drivers.
       (b) Availability of Amounts.--$5,000,000 per year, for 
     fiscal years 2001 through 2003, are made available from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to 
     the Secretary of Transportation to carry out this section.
       (c) Contract Authority; Date Available for Obligation.--The 
     amounts made available by this section from the Highway Trust 
     Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this 
     section shall be available for obligation on October 1, or as 
     soon thereafter as practicable, of the fiscal year for which 
     they are made available for obligation.

     SEC. 113. IMPROVED DATA ANALYSIS SYSTEM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     carry out a program, in cooperation with the States, to 
     improve the collection and analysis of data on crashes 
     involving commercial vehicles.
       (b) Program Administration.--The Secretary shall administer 
     the program through the National Highway Traffic Safety 
     Administration, which shall be responsible for entering into 
     agreements with the States to collect data, train State 
     employees to assure the quality and uniformity of the data, 
     and report the data by electronic means to a central data 
     repository.
       (c) Program Development.--The National Highway Traffic 
     Safety Administration and the Federal Highway Administration 
     shall develop a data program in cooperation with the States, 
     motor carriers, and other data users to determine data needs; 
     develop data definitions to assure high-quality, compatible 
     data; and create an accessible database that will improve 
     commercial vehicle safety. The program should also 
     incorporate driver citation and conviction information into 
     the data system. Emphasis should also be placed on highway 
     and traffic data.
       (d) Use of Data.--The National Highway Traffic Safety 
     Administration shall be responsible for integrating the data; 
     generating reports from the data; and making the database 
     available electronically to the Federal Highway 
     Administration, the States, motor carriers, and other 
     interested parties for problem identification, program 
     evaluation, planning, and other safety-related activities.
       (e) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the start of the 
     improved data program, the Secretary shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on the program, together with any 
     recommendations as the Secretary determines appropriate.
       (f) Availability of Amounts.--Of the amounts made available 
     under section 31107 of title 49, United States Code, 
     $10,000,000 per year, for fiscal years 2001 through 2003, may 
     be used by the Secretary of Transportation to carry out this 
     section.
       (g) Contract Authority; Date Available for Obligation.--The 
     amounts made available by this section from the Highway Trust 
     Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this 
     section shall be available for obligation on October 1, or as 
     soon thereafter as practicable, of the fiscal year for which 
     they are made available for obligation.

     SEC. 114. AUTHORIZATIONS--FISCAL YEARS 2001 THROUGH 2003.

       (a) Grants.--Section 31104(a) of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by revising paragraphs (4) through (6) to 
     read as follows:
       ``(4) Not more than $125,500,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       ``(5) Not more than $130,500,000 for fiscal year 2002.
       ``(6) Not more than $135,500,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.
       (b) Information Systems.--Section 31107(a) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended by--
       (1) striking ``and'' in paragraph (2); and
       (2) revising paragraphs (3) and (4) to read as follows:
       ``(3) $36,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 and 2002; 
     and
       ``(4) $39,500,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.

              TITLE II--HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSING SAFETY

     SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Highway-Rail Grade 
     Crossing Safety Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 202. EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION OF GRADE CROSSING PROBLEMS.

       Section 20152 of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
     to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 20152. Emergency notification of grade crossing 
       problems

       ``(a) Program.--(1) The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     promote the establishment of emergency notification systems 
     utilizing toll-free telephone numbers that the public can use 
     to convey to railroad carriers, either directly or through 
     public safety personnel, information about malfunctions of 
     automated warning devices or other safety problems at 
     highway-rail grade crossings.
       ``(2) To assist in encouraging widespread use of such 
     systems, the Secretary may provide technical assistance and 
     enter into cooperative agreements. Such assistance shall 
     include appropriate emphasis on the public safety needs 
     associated with operation of small railroads.
       ``(b) Report.--Not later than 24 months following enactment 
     of the Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety Act of 1999, the 
     Secretary shall report to Congress the status of such 
     emergency notification systems, together with any 
     recommendations for further legislation that the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.
       ``(c) Clarification of Term.--In this section, the use of 
     the term `emergency' does not alter the circumstances under 
     which a signal employee subject to the hours of service law 
     limitations in chapter 211 of this title may be permitted to 
     work up to 4 additional hours in a 24-hour period when an 
     `emergency' under section 21104(c) of this title exists and 
     the work of that employee is related to the emergency.''.

     SEC. 203. VIOLATION OF GRADE CROSSING SIGNALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 20151 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by amending the section heading to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 20151. Strategy to prevent railroad trespassing and 
       vandalism and violation of grade crossing signals'';

       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``and vandalism affecting railroad safety'' 
     and inserting ``, vandalism affecting railroad safety, and 
     violations of highway-rail grade crossing signals'';
       (B) by inserting ``, concerning trespassing and 
     vandalism,'' after ``such evaluation and review''; and
       (C) by inserting ``The second such evaluation and review, 
     concerning violations of highway-rail grade crossing signals, 
     shall be completed not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of the Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety Act of 
     1999'' after ``November 2, 1994.'';
       (3) in the subsection heading of subsection (b), by 
     inserting ``for Trespassing and Vandalism Prevention'' after 
     ``Outreach Program'';
       (4) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
       (B) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``Model Legislation.--''; 
     and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     the Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety Act of 1999, the 
     Secretary, after consultation with State and local 
     governments and railroad carriers, shall develop and make 
     available to State and local governments model State 
     legislation providing for civil or criminal penalties, or 
     both, for violations of highway-rail grade crossing 
     signals.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Definition.--In this section `violation of highway-
     rail grade crossing signals' includes any action by a motor 
     vehicle operator, unless directed by an authorized safety 
     office--
       ``(1) to drive around or through a grade crossing gate in a 
     position intended to block passage over railroad tracks;
       ``(2) to drive through a flashing grade crossing signal;
       ``(3) to drive through a grade crossing with passive 
     warning signs without determining that the grade crossing 
     could be safely crossed before any train arrives; and
       ``(4) in the vicinity of a grade crossing, that creates a 
     hazard of an accident involving injury or property damage at 
     the grade crossing.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The item relating to section 
     20151 in the table of sections for subchapter II of chapter 
     201 of title 49, United States Code, is amended to read as 
     follows:

``20151. Strategy to prevent railroad trespassing and vandalism and 
              violation of grade crossing signals.''.

     SEC. 204. NATIONAL HIGHWAY-RAIL CROSSING INVENTORY.

       (a) Amendment.--Subchapter II of chapter 201 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 20154. National highway-rail crossing inventory

       ``(a) Mandatory Initial Reporting of Crossing 
     Information.--No later than September 30, 2001, each railroad 
     carrier shall--
       ``(1) report to the Secretary of Transportation certain 
     information, as specified by the Secretary by rule or order 
     issued after notice and opportunity for public comment or by 
     guidelines, concerning each highway-

[[Page 19974]]

     rail crossing through which the carrier operates; or
       ``(2) otherwise ensure that the information has been 
     reported to the Secretary by that date.
       ``(b) Mandatory Periodic Updating of Crossing 
     Information.--On a periodic basis beginning no later than 
     September 30, 2003, and not less often than September 30 of 
     every third year thereafter, or as otherwise specified by the 
     Secretary of Transportation by rule or order issued after 
     notice and opportunity for public comment or by guidelines, 
     each railroad carrier shall--
       ``(1) report to the Secretary certain current information, 
     as specified by the Secretary by rule or order issued after 
     notice and opportunity for public comment or by guidelines, 
     concerning each highway-rail grade crossing through which it 
     operates; or
       ``(2) otherwise ensure that the information has been 
     reported to the Secretary by that date.
       ``(c) Definitions.--In this section--
       ``(1) `highway-rail crossing' means a location within a 
     State where a public highway, road, street, or private 
     roadway, including associated sidewalks and pathways, crosses 
     1 or more railroad tracks either at grade or grade separated; 
     and
       ``(2) `State' means a State of the United States, the 
     District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana 
     Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands.''.
       (b) Table of Sections Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     chapter 201 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding after item 20153 the following:

``20154. National highway-rail crossing inventory.''.
       (c) Amendment.--Section 130 of title 23, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by amending the section heading to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 130. Highway-rail crossings'';

     and
       (2) by inserting the following new subsection at the end:
       ``(k) National Highway-Rail Crossing Inventory.--
       ``(1) Mandatory initial reporting of crossing 
     information.--No later than September 30, 2001, each State 
     shall--
       ``(A) report to the Secretary of Transportation certain 
     information, as specified by the Secretary by rule or order 
     issued after notice and opportunity for public comment or by 
     guidelines, concerning each highway-rail crossing located 
     within its borders; or
       ``(B) otherwise ensure that the information has been 
     reported to the Secretary by that date.
       ``(2) Mandatory periodic updating of crossing 
     information.--On a periodic basis beginning no later than 
     September 30, 2003, and not less often than by September 30, 
     of every third year thereafter, or as otherwise specified by 
     the Secretary of Transportation by rule or order issued after 
     notice and opportunity for public comment or by guidelines, 
     each State shall--
       ``(A) report to the Secretary certain current information, 
     as determined by the Secretary by rule or order issued after 
     notice and opportunity for public comment or by guidelines, 
     concerning each highway-rail crossing located within its 
     borders; or
       ``(B) otherwise ensure that the information has been 
     reported to the Secretary by that date.
       ``(3) Definitions.--In this subsection--
       ``(A) `highway-rail crossing' means a location where a 
     public highway, road, street, or private roadway, including 
     associated sidewalks and pathways, crosses 1 or more railroad 
     tracks either at grade or grade separated; and
       ``(B) `State' means a State of the United States, the 
     District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana 
     Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands.''.
       (d) Table of Sections Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking the existing item for section 130 and inserting the 
     following:

``130. Highway-rail crossings.''.
       (e) Civil Penalties.--(1) Section 21301(a)(1) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking the period at the end of the first sentence 
     and inserting ``or with section 20154 of this title.''; and
       (B) in the second sentence, by inserting ``or violating 
     section 20154'' between ``chapter 201'' and ``is liable''.
       (2) Section 21301(a)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the first sentence the following: 
     ``The Secretary shall subject a person to a civil penalty for 
     a violation of section 20154 of this title.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. McCain):
  S. 1560. A bill to establish the Shivwits Plateau National 
Conservation Area; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources


     SHIVWITS PLATEAU NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA ESTABLISHMENT ACT

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise today along with my colleague Senator 
McCain to introduce legislation creating a national conservation area 
on the Shivwits Plateau/Parashant Canyon area of northwest Arizona. I 
am introducing this legislation to conserve, protect, and enhance for 
the benefit of present and future generations the existing landscapes, 
native wildlife and vegetation as well as the prehistoric, historic, 
scenic, and traditional human values of the area. This is a bill about 
the future, and I think it is important that we recognize the unique 
value of this land and its link to our past.
  I have personally toured this area and was impressed with its vast 
landscapes and scenic vistas. I came away with the conviction that the 
area deserves additional protective status. The area is remote, yet it 
supports a few human activities, such as ranching, hunting, 
sightseeing, camping and hiking. I believe those uses can continue 
without threatening the natural environment or any historic or 
prehistoric artifacts that may be found in the area.
  Designation of these lands as a national conservation area will serve 
these goals by increasing attention to and interest in the area by both 
the public and the federal government. By spotlighting this area, the 
Bureau of Land Management will be compelled, and empowered, to increase 
the monetary and personnel resources allocated to this area, and better 
focus its management on preserving and protecting the conservation 
area's unique values.
  This bill also requires the BLM to develop and carry out forest-
restoration projects on both ponderosa pine and pinon-juniper forests 
within the conservation area. The goal of these projects will be to 
restore our forests to their pre-settlement conditions. The forest-
health crisis in our southwestern forests is acute, and efforts are 
currently underway by the BLM at Mount Trumbull to address this 
problem. This legislation builds on those efforts.
  Designation as a national conservation area may also result in the 
limiting of some future human activities like mining. There are no 
current threats to the area, so existing traditional human uses can and 
should be allowed to continue. In this case, protecting the environment 
and continuing existing uses are not mutually exclusive. This bill 
preserves both the land and the traditional lifestyle of the area.
  Proposals have been made to designate this area as a national 
monument. Such an action, however, would be done by presidential fiat 
under the Antiquities Act--that would subvert the public process. We do 
not want a repeat of the stealthy, election year political maneuver 
that resulted in the creation of the Escalante/Grand Staircase National 
Monument in 1996. The people of Arizona and Utah, and their elected 
representatives, deserve better. We must have a say in this process, 
including the ability to meaningfully review and comment upon any 
proposal to change the management of the area. It is only fair that the 
people who would be most affected by such a designation have that 
opportunity. I am addressing the need for local input into this process 
by introduction of this bill. The first step in seeking public input is 
through the legislative process itself. The legislative process will 
ensure that the public has a voice. The next step is the section of the 
bill creating an advisory committee of interested parties to assist the 
BLM in the land-planning process.
  National monument status for this area would also forever preclude 
any type of mining activity. This would be a totally irresponsible 
action. Let me stress that at this time there are no active mining 
activities, nor does it appear that any are planned for the foreseeable 
future within the proposed conservation area. However, we do not know 
for certain what mineral deposits may be located in the area, or in 
what quantity. We do know that there are some uranium and copper 
deposits. The nation does not currently need these resources, but 
prudence would dictate that we not lock up these minerals with no 
possibility for future extraction. While we appear to have adequate 
uranium resources for current needs, policy or conditions may change 
and our national interest may be served by allowing them to be 
extracted in the future.
  This legislation strikes a balance between the desire to preserve the 
land in

[[Page 19975]]

its present state, and potential future national needs. Under the bill, 
the lands will be withdrawn from mineral entry under the 1872 mining 
law, but are subject to mineral leasing at the discretion of the 
Secretary of the Interior. This is consistent with the current status 
of other specially designated federal lands such as the Lake Mead and 
Glen Canyon National Recreation Areas. It is also consistent with the 
Secretary of the Interior's segregation of the area. Under the federal 
mineral leasing laws, the Secretary has broad discretion regarding 
whether to allow mining in a particular area; the amount of royalties 
to charge; the duration of the lease; environmental considerations; and 
reclamation. Thus, authorizing the Secretary to approve mineral leasing 
within the conservation area protects the national interest in these 
minerals while also preserving the environment.
  Mr. President, I am proud to introduce this important piece of 
legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1560

       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 ``Shivwits Plateau National 
     Conservation Area Establishment Act''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to establish the Shivwits 
     Plateau National Conservation Area to conserve, protect, and 
     enhance for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future 
     generations the landscapes, native wildlife and vegetation, 
     and prehistoric, historic, scenic, and traditional human 
     values of the conservation area (including ranching, hunting, 
     sightseeing, camping and hiking).

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Conservation Area.--The term ``conservation area'' 
     means the Shivwits Plateau National Conservation Area 
     established by section 2.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau of 
     Land Management.

      SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF SHIVWITS PLATEAU NATIONAL 
                   CONSERVATION AREA, ARIZONA.

       (a) In General.--There is established the Shivwits Plateau 
     National Conservation Area in the State of Arizona.
       (b) Areas Included.--The Shivwits Plateau National 
     Conservation Area shall be comprised of approximately 381,800 
     acres of land administered by the Secretary in Mohave County, 
     Arizona, as generally depicted on the map entitled ``Shivwits 
     Plateau National Conservation Area--Proposed'', numbered __, 
     dated __.
       (c) Map and Legal Description.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a map and legal description of the conservation area.
       (2) Force and effect.--The map and legal description shall 
     have the same force and effect as if included in this Act.
       (3) Public availability.--Copies of the map and legal 
     description shall be on file and available for public 
     inspection in--
       (A) the Office of the Director of the Bureau of Land 
     Management; and
       (B) the appropriate office of the Bureau of Land Management 
     in Arizona.

      SEC. 5. MANAGEMENT OF CONSERVATION AREA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall manage the 
     conservation area in a manner that conserves, protects, and 
     enhances all of the values specified in section 2 under the 
     Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 
     1701 et seq.), this Act, and other applicable law.
       (b) Hunting and Fishing.--The Secretary shall permit 
     hunting and fishing in the conservation area in accordance 
     with the laws of the State of Arizona.
       (c) Grazing.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall permit the grazing of 
     livestock in the conservation area.
       (2) Applicable law.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
     grazing in the conservation area is conducted in accordance 
     with all laws (including regulations) that apply to the 
     issuance and administration of grazing leases on other land 
     under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (d) Forest Restoration.--The Secretary shall develop and 
     carry out forest restoration projects on Ponderosa Pine 
     forests and Pinion-Juniper forests in the conservation area, 
     with the goal of restoring the land in the conservation area 
     to presettlement condition.
       (e) Advisory Committee.--
       (1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     advisory committee for the conservation area, to be known as 
     the ``Shivwits Plateau National Conservation Area Advisory 
     Committee'', the purpose of which shall be to advise the 
     Secretary with respect to the preparation and implementation 
     of the management plan required by section 6.
       (2) Representation.--The advisory committee shall be 
     comprised of 9 members appointed by the Secretary, of whom--
       (A) 1 shall be a grazing permittee in good standing with 
     the Bureau of Land Management who has maintained a grazing 
     allotment within the boundaries of the conservation area for 
     not less than 5 years;
       (B) 1 shall be the chairperson of the Kaibab Band of Paiute 
     Indians;
       (C) 1 shall be an individual with a recognized background 
     in ecological restoration, research, and application, to be 
     appointed from among nominations made by Northern Arizona 
     University;
       (D) 1 shall be the Arizona State Land Commissioner;
       (E) 1 shall be an Arizona State Game and Fish Commissioner;
       (F) 1 shall be an official of the State of Utah (other than 
     an elected official), to be appointed from among nominations 
     made by the Arizona Strip Regional Planning Task Force;
       (G) 1 shall be a representative of a recognized 
     environmental organization;
       (H) 1 shall be a local elected official from the State of 
     Arizona, to be appointed from among nominations made by the 
     Arizona Strip Regional Planning Task Force; and
       (I) 1 shall be a local elected official from the State of 
     Utah, to be appointed from among nominations made by the 
     Arizona Strip Regional Planning Task Force.
       (3) Terms.--
       (A) In general.--A member of the advisory committee shall 
     be appointed for a term of 3 years, except that, of the 
     members first appointed, 3 members shall be appointed for a 
     term of 1 year and 3 members shall be appointed for a term of 
     2 years.
       (B) Reappointment.--A member may be reappointed to serve on 
     the advisory committee on expiration of the member's term.

      SEC. 6. MANAGEMENT PLAN.

       (a) Existing Management Plans.--The Secretary shall manage 
     the conservation area under resource management plans in 
     effect or the date of enactment of this Act, including the 
     Arizona Strip Resource Management Plan, the Parashant 
     Interdisciplinary Plan, and the Mt. Trumbull 
     Interdisciplinary Plan.
       (b) Future Management Plans.-- Future revisions of 
     management plans for the conservation area shall be adopted 
     in compliance with the goals and objectives of this Act.

      SEC. 7. ACQUISITION OF LAND.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may acquire State or private 
     land or interests in land within the boundaries of the 
     conservation area only by--
       (1) donation;
       (2) purchase with donated or appropriated funds from a 
     willing seller; or
       (3) exchange with a willing party.
       (b) Exchanges.--
       (1) In general.--During the 2-year period beginning on the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make a 
     diligent effort to acquire, by exchange, from willing parties 
     all State trust lands, subsurface rights, and valid mining 
     claims within the conservation area.
       (2) Inverse condemnation.--If an exchange requested by a 
     property owner is not completed by the end of the period, the 
     property owner that requested the exchange may, at any time 
     after the end of the period--
       (A) declare that the owner's State trust lands, subsurface 
     rights, or valid mining claims within the conservation area 
     have been taken by inverse condemnation; and
       (B) seek compensation from the United States in United 
     States district court.
       (c) Valuation of Private Property.--
       (1) In general.--The United States shall pay the fair 
     market value for any property acquired under this section.
       (2) Assessment.--The value of the property shall be 
     assessed as if the conservation area did not exist.

      SEC. 8. MINERAL ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND RELATIONSHIP TO 
                   MINING LAWS.

       (a) Assessment Program.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall assess the 
     oil, gas, coal, uranium, and other mineral potential on 
     Federal land in the conservation area.
       (b) Peer Review.--The mineral assessment program shall--
       (1) be subject to review by the Arizona State Department of 
     Mines and Mineral Resources; and
       (2) shall not be considered to be complete until the 
     results of the assessment are approved by the Arizona State 
     Department of Mines and Mineral Resources.
       (c) Relation to Mining Laws.--Subject to valid existing 
     rights, the public land within the conservation area is 
     withdrawn from mineral location, entry, and patent under 
     chapter 6 of the Revised Statutes (commonly known as the 
     ``General Mining Law of 1872'') (30 U.S.C. section 21 et 
     seq.).
       (d) Mineral Leasing.--The Secretary shall permit the 
     removal of--

[[Page 19976]]

       (1) nonleasable minerals from land or an interest in land 
     within the national conservation area in the manner 
     prescribed by section 10 of the Act of August 4, 1939 (43 
     Stat. 38); and
       (2) leasable minerals from land or an interest in lands 
     within the conservation area in accordance with the Act of 
     February 25, 1920 (commonly known as the ``Mineral Lands 
     Leasing Act of 1920'') (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) or the Mineral 
     Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30 U.S.C. 351 et seq.).
       (e) Disposition of Funds From Permits and Leases.--
       (1) Receipts from permits and leases.--Receipts derived 
     from permits and leases issued on land in the conservation 
     area under the Act of February 25, 1920 (30 U.S.C. 181 et 
     seq.) or the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30 
     U.S.C. 351 et seq.), shall be disposed of as provided in the 
     applicable Act.
       (2) Recipts from disposition of nonleasable minerals.--
     Receipts from the disposition of nonleasable minerals within 
     the conservation area shall be disposed of in the same manner 
     as proceeds of the sale of public land.

      SEC. 9. EFFECT ON WATER RIGHTS.

       Nothing in this Act--
       (1) establishes a new or implied reservation to the United 
     States of any water or water-related right with respect to 
     land included in the conservation area; or
       (2) authorizes the appropriation of water, except in 
     accordance with the substantive and procedural law of the 
     State of Arizona.

      SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ABRAHAM:
  S. 1561. A bill to amend the Controlled Substances Act to add gamma 
hydroxybutyric acid and ketamine to the schedules of control 
substances, to provide for a national awareness campaign, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                   date-rape drug control act of 1999

  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Date Rape Drug 
Control Act of 1999. This legislation will address a growing epidemic 
in our land that is taking too many lives.
  Mr. President, so-called date-rape drugs are becoming increasingly 
common in our nation. These drugs, so named because they are used in 
order to incapacitate women and make them vulnerable to sexual assault, 
are finding their way into nightclubs, onto campuses and into homes. 
They are being used by sexual predators against young--sometimes very 
young--women. The results are terrible and often tragic. Women 
victimized by drugs like gamma hydroxybutyric acid (or GHB) and 
Ketamine may be raped, they may become violently ill, and they may die.
  Mr. President, I'd like to give just one example of the horrible 
consequences of drugs like GHB and Ketamine. In January of this year 
three young girls, none of them yet 16, were at a party given by a 25 
year-old man in Woodhaven, Michigan. 15 year-old Samantha Reid drank a 
Mountain Dew--a soft drink--and passed out within minutes. She vomited 
in her sleep, and she died. Her friend, Melanie Sindone, also 15, 
passed out and lapsed into a coma, but has fortunately survived. The 
third young woman, Jessica VanWassehnova, had traces of GHB in her 
blood and only had a minor reaction of nausea. The three teenage boys 
are now facing manslaughter and felony poison charges.
  These two girls had no reason to believe that they were drinking 
anything dangerous. But they were wrong. Their drinks had been laced 
with both GHB and Ketamine. Men at the party apparently put these drugs 
in the girls' drinks, to a tragic result.
  Mr. President, this was a terrible series of events, and one that has 
been repeated far too many times. Our young women are being raped and 
killed by sexual predators using GHB and Ketamine. And that must stop.
  The Date Rape Drug Control Act will provide law enforcement personnel 
with the tools they need to fight the date-rape epidemic. It directs 
that GHB and Ketamine be classified as Schedule I controlled 
substances, as drugs like heroin and cocaine are today. In addition, 
the bill authorizes additional reporting requirements that will enhance 
the ability of authorities to track the manufacture, distribution and 
dispensing of GHB and similar products. And it directs the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services to submit annual reports to Congress 
estimating the number of incidents of date-rape drug abuse that 
occurred during the most recent year for which data are available.
  Finally, Mr. President, this bill requires the Secretary, in 
consultation with the Attorney General, to develop a plan for carrying 
out a national campaign to educate individuals about the dangers of 
date-rape drugs, the fact that they are controlled substances and the 
penalties involved for violating the Controlled Substances Act, how to 
recognize symptoms indicating that an individual may be a victim of 
date-rape drugs, and how to respond when an individual has these 
symptoms.
  The last provision is crucial, Mr. President, because those who use 
date-rape drugs depend on stealth in praying upon their victims. Young 
women who are on the look-out, who know what to look for and can 
recognize the signs of date-rape drug use will be at much lower risk of 
falling victim to GHB or Ketamine.
  It is time to act, Mr. President, to save young people, and young 
women in particular, from these deadly drugs and from the predators who 
use them. I ask my colleagues to give this important legislation their 
full support.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Date-Rape 
Drug Control Act of 1999 and a section-by-section analysis be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1561

       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 ``Date-Rape Drug Control Act 
     of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds as follows:
       (1) Gamma hydroxybutyric acid (also called G, Liquid X, 
     Liquid Ecstasy, Grievous Bodily Harm, Georgia Home Boy, 
     Scoop) has become a significant and growing problem in law 
     enforcement. At least 20 States have scheduled such drug in 
     their drug laws and law enforcement officials have been 
     experiencing an increased presence of the drug in driving 
     under the influence, sexual assault, and overdose cases 
     especially at night clubs and parties.
       (2) A behavioral depressant and a hypnotic, gamma 
     hydroxybutyric acid (``GHB'') is being used in conjunction 
     with alcohol and other drugs with detrimental effects in an 
     increasing number of cases. It is difficult to isolate the 
     impact of such drug's ingestion since it is so typically 
     taken with an ever-changing array of other drugs and 
     especially alcohol which potentiates its impact.
       (3) GHB takes the same path as alcohol, processes via 
     alcohol dehydrogenase, and its symptoms at high levels of 
     intake and as impact builds are comparable to alcohol 
     ingestion/intoxication. Thus, aggression and violence can be 
     expected in some individuals who use such drug.
       (4) If taken for human consumption, common industrial 
     chemicals such as gamma butyrolactone and 1.4-butanediol are 
     swiftly converted by the body into GHB. Illicit use of these 
     and other GHB analogues and precursor chemicals is a 
     significant and growing law enforcement problem.
       (5) A human pharmaceutical formulation of gamma 
     hydroxybutyric acid is being developed as a treatment for 
     cataplexy, a serious and debilitating disease. Cataplexy, 
     which causes sudden and total loss of muscle control, affects 
     about 65 percent of the estimated 180,000 Americans with 
     narcolepsy, a sleep disorder. People with cataplexy often are 
     unable to work, drive a car, hold their children or live a 
     normal life.

     SEC. 3. ADDITION OF GAMMA HYDROXYBUTYRIC ACID AND KETAMINE TO 
                   SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES; GAMMA 
                   BUTYROLACTONE AS ADDITIONAL LIST I CHEMICAL.

       (a) Addition to Schedule I.--
       (1) In general.--Section 202(c) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812(c)) is amended by adding at the 
     end of schedule I the following:
       ``(d) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in 
     another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or 
     preparation, which contains any quantity of the following 
     substance having a depressant effect on the central nervous 
     system, or which contains any of their salts, isomers, and 
     salts of isomers whenever the existence of such salts, 
     isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific 
     chemical designation:
       ``(1) Gamma hydroxybutyric acid.''.
       (2) Security of facilities.--For purposes of any 
     requirements that relate to the physical security of 
     registered manufacturers and registered distributors, gamma 
     hydroxybutyric acid and its salts, isomers, and salts

[[Page 19977]]

     of isomers manufactured, distributed, or possessed in 
     accordance with an exemption approved under section 505(i) of 
     the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act shall be treated as 
     a controlled substance in schedule III under section 202(c) 
     of the Controlled Substances Act.
       (b) Addition to Schedule III.--Schedule III under section 
     202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812(c)) is 
     amended in (b)--
       (1) by redesignating (4) through (10) as (6) through (12), 
     respectively; and
       (2) by redesignating (3) as (4);
       (3) by inserting after (2) the following:
       ``(3) Gamma hydroxybutyric acid and its salts, isomers, and 
     salts of isomers contained in a drug product for which an 
     application has been approved under section 505 of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.''; and
       (4) by inserting after (4) (as so redesignated) the 
     following:
       ``(5) Ketamine and its salts, isomers, and salts of 
     isomers.''.
       (c) Additional List I Chemical.--Section 102(34) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(34)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (X) as subparagraph (Y); 
     and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (W) the following 
     subparagraph:
       ``(X) Gamma butyrolactone.''.
       (d) Rule of Construction Regarding Controlled Substance 
     Analogues.--Section 102(32) of the Controlled Substances Act 
     (21 U.S.C. 802(32)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``subparagraph (B)'' 
     and inserting ``subparagraph (C)'';
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new 
     subparagraph (B):
       ``(B) The designation of gamma butyrolactone or any other 
     chemical as a listed chemical pursuant to paragraph (34) or 
     (35) does not preclude a finding pursuant to subparagraph (A) 
     that the chemical is a controlled substance analogue.''.
       (e) Penalties Regarding Schedule I.--
       (1) In general.--Section 401(b)(1)(C) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(C)) is amended in the 
     first sentence by inserting after ``schedule I or II,'' the 
     following: ``gamma hydroxybutyric acid in schedule III,''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 401(b)(1)(D) of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(D)) is amended 
     by inserting ``(other than gamma hydroxybutyric acid)'' after 
     ``schedule III''.
       (f) Distribution With Intent To Commit Crime of Violence.--
     Section 401(b)(7)(A) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 
     U.S.C. 841(b)(7)(A)) is amended by inserting ``or controlled 
     substance analogue'' after ``distributing a controlled 
     substance''.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORITY FOR ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR 
                   GAMMA HYDROXYBUTYRIC PRODUCTS IN SCHEDULE III.

       Section 307 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     827) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) In the case of a drug product containing gamma 
     hydroxybutyric acid for which an application has been 
     approved under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act, the Attorney General may, in addition to any 
     other requirements that apply under this section with respect 
     to such a drug product, establish any of the following as 
     reporting requirements:
       ``(1) That every person who is registered as a manufacturer 
     of bulk or dosage form, as a packager, repackager, labeler, 
     relabeler, or distributor shall report acquisition and 
     distribution transactions quarterly, not later than the 15th 
     day of the month succeeding the quarter for which the report 
     is submitted, and annually report end-of-year inventories.
       ``(2) That all annual inventory reports shall be filed no 
     later than January 15 of the year following that for which 
     the report is submitted and include data on the stocks of the 
     drug product, drug substance, bulk drug, and dosage forms on 
     hand as of the close of business December 31, indicating 
     whether materials reported are in storage or in process of 
     manufacturing.
       ``(3) That every person who is registered as a manufacturer 
     of bulk or dosage form shall report all manufacturing 
     transactions both inventory increases, including purchases, 
     transfers, and returns, and reductions from inventory, 
     including sales, transfers, theft, destruction, and seizure, 
     and shall provide data on material manufactured, manufactured 
     from other material, use in manufacturing other material, and 
     use in manufacturing dosage forms.
       ``(4) That all reports under this section must include the 
     registered person's registration number as well as the 
     registration numbers, names, and other identifying 
     information of vendors, suppliers, and customers, sufficient 
     to allow the Attorney General to track the receipt and 
     distribution of the drug.
       ``(5) That each dispensing practitioner shall maintain for 
     each prescription the name of the prescribing practitioner, 
     the prescribing practitioner's Federal and State registration 
     numbers, with the expiration dates of these registrations, 
     verification that the prescribing practitioner possesses the 
     appropriate registration to prescribe this controlled 
     substance, the patient's name and address, the name of the 
     patient's insurance provider and documentation by a medical 
     practitioner licensed and registered to prescribe the drug of 
     the patient's medical need for the drug. Such information 
     shall be available for inspection and copying by the Attorney 
     General.
       ``(6) That section 310(b)(3) (relating to mail order 
     reporting) applies with respect to gamma hydroxybutyric acid 
     to the same extent and in the same manner as such section 
     applies with respect to the chemicals and drug products 
     specified in subparagraph (A)(i) of such section.''.

     SEC. 5. DEVELOPMENT OF FORENSIC FIELD TESTS FOR GAMMA 
                   HYDROXYBUTYRIC ACID.

       The Attorney General shall make a grant for the development 
     of forensic field tests to assist law enforcement officials 
     in detecting the presence of gamma hydroxybutyric acid and 
     related substances.

     SEC. 6. ANNUAL REPORT REGARDING DATE-RAPE DRUGS; NATIONAL 
                   AWARENESS CAMPAIGN.

       (a) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services (in this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') 
     shall periodically submit to Congress reports each of which 
     provides an estimate of the number of incidents of the abuse 
     of date-rape drugs (as defined in subsection (c)) that 
     occurred during the most recent one-year period for which 
     data are available. The first such report shall be submitted 
     not later than January 15, 2000, and subsequent reports shall 
     be submitted annually thereafter.
       (b) National Awareness Campaign.--
       (1) Development of plan; recommendations of advisory 
     committee.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Attorney General, shall develop a plan for carrying out a 
     national campaign to educate individuals described in 
     subparagraph (B) on the following:
       (i) The dangers of date-rape drugs.
       (ii) The applicability of the Controlled Substances Act to 
     such drugs, including penalties under such Act.
       (iii) Recognizing the symptoms that indicate an individual 
     may be a victim of such drugs, including symptoms with 
     respect to sexual assault.
       (iv) Appropriately responding when an individual has such 
     symptoms.
       (B) Intended population.--The individuals referred to in 
     subparagraph (A) are young adults, youths, law enforcement 
     personnel, educators, school nurses, counselors of rape 
     victims, and emergency room personnel in hospitals.
       (C) Advisory committee.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     establish an advisory committee to make recommendations to 
     the Secretary regarding the plan under subparagraph (A). The 
     committee shall be composed of individuals who collectively 
     possess expertise on the effects of date-rape drugs and on 
     detecting and controlling the drugs.
       (2) Implementation of plan.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date on which the advisory committee under paragraph (1) 
     is established, the Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Attorney General, shall commence carrying out the national 
     campaign under such paragraph in accordance with the plan 
     developed under such paragraph. The campaign may be carried 
     out directly by the Secretary and through grants and 
     contracts.
       (3) Evaluation by general accounting office.--Not later 
     than two years after the date on which the national campaign 
     under paragraph (1) is commenced, the Comptroller General of 
     the United States shall submit to Congress an evaluation of 
     the effects with respect to date-rape drugs of the national 
     campaign.
       (c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``date-rape drugs'' means gamma hydroxybutyric acid and its 
     salts, isomers, and salts of isomers and such other drugs or 
     substances as the Secretary, after consultation with the 
     Attorney General, determines to be appropriate.
                                  ____


    Date-Rape Drug Control Act of 1999--Section-by-Section Analysis

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       ``Date-Rape Drug Control Act of 1999''

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       This section sets out congressional findings regarding the 
     use of gamma hydroxybutyric acid, ketamine, and gamma 
     butyrolactone to facilitate sexual and other assaults.

     SEC. 3. ADDITION OF GAMMA HYDROXYBUTYRIC ACID AND KETAMINE 
                   (GHB) TO SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES; 
                   GAMMA BUTYROLACTONE AS ADDITIONAL LIST 1 
                   CHEMICAL.

       This section amends section 202(c) the Controlled 
     Substances Act to add gamma hydroxybutric acid and its salts 
     to the list of Schedule I drugs, unless these substances are 
     specifically excepted or listed in another schedule.
       For purposes of requirements in the Controlled Substances 
     Act relating to the physical security of the facilities of 
     registered manufacturers, gamma hydroxybutyric acid and its 
     salts, isomers, and salts of isomers which are manufactured, 
     distributed or possessed in accordance with an exemption

[[Page 19978]]

     under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
     Act (i.e., an investigational new drug exemption or ``IND'') 
     shall be treated as a controlled substance in Schedule III of 
     the Controlled Substances Act (as opposed to Schedule I).
       This section also amends section 202(c) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act to add Ketamine and its salts, isomers, and 
     salts of isomer to the list of Schedule III drugs and section 
     102(34) of the Controlled Substances Act to add gamma 
     butyrolactone (GBL) to the list of List I chemicals.
       Further, under this section, gamma hydroxbutyric acid and 
     its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers which are contained 
     in a drug that has been approved by the Food and Drug 
     Administration (FDA) is scheduled under Schedule III. 
     However, the section imposes Schedule I penalties (as opposed 
     to the penalties that would apply under Schedule III).
       This section amends section 102(32) of the Controlled 
     Substances Act to include that the designation of gamma 
     butyrolactone or any other chemical as a ``List I'' or a 
     ``List II'' precursor chemical does not preclude a finding 
     that the chemical is a controlled substance analogue.
       Section 401(b)(7)(A) of the Controlled Substances Act is 
     amended by including penalties for distribution of a 
     ``controlled substance analogue'' with the intent to commit a 
     crime of violence (including rape).

     SEC. 4. AUTHORITY FOR ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR 
                   GAMMA HYDROXYBUTYRIC PRODUCTS IN SCHEDULE III.

       This section amends section 307 of the Controlled 
     Substances Act for approved drugs containing gamma 
     hydroxybutyric acid to permit the Attorney General to 
     establish additional reporting requirements that may enhance 
     the ability of authorities to track the manufacturing, 
     distribution, and dispensing of these drugs, including mail 
     order distribution and dispensing.

     SEC. 5. DEVELOPMENT OF FORENSIC FIELD TESTS FOR GAMMA 
                   HYDROXYBUTRIC ACID.

       This section requires the Attorney General to make a grant 
     for the development of forensic field tests to assist law 
     enforcement officials in detecting the presence of gamma 
     hdroxybutric acid and related substances.

     SEC. 6. ANNUAL REPORT REGARDING DATE-RAPE DRUGS; NATIONAL 
                   AWARENESS CAMPAIGN.

       This section requires the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services to submit annual reports to Congress estimating the 
     number of incidents of date-rape drug abuse that occurred 
     during the most recent year for which data are available. The 
     first report is due January 15, 2000.
       This section also requires the Secretary, in consultation 
     with the Attorney General, to develop a plan for carrying out 
     a national campaign to educate individuals about the dangers 
     of date-rape drugs, the fact that they are controlled 
     substances and the penalties involved for violating the 
     Controlled Substances Act, how to recognize the symptoms 
     indicating an individual may be a victim of date-rape drugs, 
     and how to appropriately respond when an individual has such 
     symptoms. This campaign is directly not only at young adults 
     and youths, but also at law enforcement personnel, educator, 
     school nurses, counselors of rape victims, and hospital 
     emergency room personnel.
       To advise the Secretary on the plan, this section directs 
     the Secretary to establish an advisory committee composed of 
     individuals possessing expertise on the effects of date-rape 
     drugs and on detecting and controlling drugs. The advisory 
     committee must be established within 180 days after the 
     enactment of this legislation. Within 180 days after the 
     advisory committee is established, the Secretary must 
     implement the campaign.
       No later than two years after the campaign begins, the 
     Comptroller General is directed to submit to Congress an 
     evaluation of its effectiveness and recommendations for 
     improving its effectiveness, if appropriate.
       This section defines ``date-rape drugs'' as GHB and its 
     salts and such other drugs as the Secretary, after 
     consultation with the Attorney General, determines to be 
     appropriate.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NICKLES:
  S. 1562. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
classify certain franchise operation property as 15-year depreciable 
property; to the Committee on Finance.


         Small Business Franchise Property Recovery Act of 1999

  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the 
``Small Business Franchise Property Recovery Act of 1999.'' This bill 
would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to classify certain 
franchise operation property as 15-year depreciable property.
  As my colleagues may recall, the recovery period for real estate 
property and building improvements was generally extended to 39 years 
in 1984 primarily for revenue reasons. Since that time, growing 
concerns have been voiced that having such an extended recovery period 
is neither justifiable nor based on sound tax policy. In many cases, 39 
years is far longer than the normal use life of the property. Congress 
has directed the Treasury Department by early next year to provide us 
with a study and recommendations for overhauling the tax code's 
depreciation provisions. I look forward to receiving the Treasury's 
report, but in the interim, I do not believe we should defer addressing 
obvious depreciation inequities. Therefore, I am offering this bill now 
to shorten the depreciation period for real property and buildings for 
all franchisees from 39 years to 15 years.
  Mr. President, franchisees-such as those who operate quick-service 
food restaurants generally enter into a franchise agreement with the 
franchisor that terminates after a set period of time (e.g., 15 or 20 
years). There typically is no guaranteed right to renew the agreement. 
Franchisees often must undertake major renovations and improvements to 
the property at least once during the franchisee period.
  Under current law, the real estate and buildings owned by franchisees 
generally must be written off over 39 years. This extended depreciation 
period bears no relation to economic reality and is roughly double the 
normal use life of the franchise property.
  The ``Small Business Property Recovery Act of 1999'' would reduce the 
39 year recovery period for such franchisee property to 15 years. This 
shorter period, which tracks the convenience store precedent, would 
essentially reflect the property's use life. This would be fairer to 
the small and closely held businesses that operate quick-service 
restaurants and other franchises. It also would enable them to free-up 
more capital to expand their businesses and create more jobs.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to cosponsor this 
bill. I would also note that Representative Ramstad recently has 
introduced a similar bill, H.R. 2451, in the House. I look forward to 
working with him and others to help secure the passage of this 
legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1562

       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 ``Small Business Franchise 
     Property Recovery Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. CLASS LIFE FOR FRANCHISE OPERATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 168(e)(3)(E) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1996 (classifying certain property as 15-year 
     property) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of the 
     clause (ii), by striking the period at the end of clause 
     (iii) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the 
     following new clause:
       ``(iv) any section 1250 property which is a franchise 
     operation subject to section 1253.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Subparagraph (B) of section 
     168(g)(3) of such Code is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to subparagraph (E)(iii) in the table contained 
     therein the following new item:

  ``(E)(iv).......................................................15''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property which is placed in service on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act and to which 
     section 168 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 applies 
     after the amendment made by section 201 of the Tax Reform Act 
     of 1986. A taxpayer may elect (in such form and manner as the 
     Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe) to have such 
     amendments apply with respect to any property placed in 
     service before such date and to which such section so 
     applies.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Hagel):
  S. 1563. A bill to establish the Immigration Affairs Agency within 
the Department of Justice, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.


               ins reform and border security act of 1999

  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the INS Reform and 
Border Security Act. Today, there is widespread agreement that the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service does not handle either its 
service or its law enforcement functions well. On the enforcement side, 
the INS has shown an inability to recruit, hire, and retain the Border 
Patrol agents mandated by

[[Page 19979]]

Congress. The agency's detention policies are at best inconsistent. Its 
computer systems and methods for tracking and deporting criminal aliens 
has proven inadequate. And the list could continue. On the service 
side, the situation is similarly troubling. Stories of lost files, 
misplaced fingerprints, and broken-hearted applicants are far too 
common. Congressional offices are overwhelmed with the number of 
requests from constituents seeking help with their cases at INS. The 
INS is generally unable to update an individual on the status of his or 
her case. Any the backlogs have become so lengthy at the INS that few 
can anticipate action on their case, whether for citizenship or 
adjustment of status, within 18 months. The system is broken.
  In the February 1999 Government Performance Project report, 
administered by the Syracuse University, the INS came in dead last 
among 15 federal agencies. INS received an overall grade of C-, while 
gathering grades of D in both management and human resources, and C in 
information technology. These grades were perhaps generous. A DOJ 
Inspector General report recently concluded that the INS ``still does 
not adequately manage'' its computer system and expressed concerns that 
much money has been wasted on an $800 million computer system.
  The current structure of the INS--concentrated in District Offices 
around the country that combine service and enforcement functions--is a 
cause of a number of its problems. These offices are run by District 
Directors who are not required to have law enforcement backgrounds. 
Moreover, they can hold their posts for 15 years or more, resulting in 
``fiefdoms'' that make it difficult to improve service or enforcement, 
or for headquarters to receive adherence from the field for policy 
changes. By combining the service and enforcement functions in one 
entity, the agency has taken on dual missions that in many ways are 
incompatible. Serious problems have resulted in expecting the INS to be 
the good service provider by day in facilitating legal immigration and 
naturalization, and the tough ``cop'' by night combating illegal 
immigration and criminal aliens. This is a point I made in my first 
speech as chairman of the immigration subcommittee and it remains my 
view today. Permitting the INS to move forward with its current 
structure and organization only ensures an endless recurrence of the 
same problems we have seen for years at the agency.
  The INS Reform and Border Security Act would represent fundamental 
change. It would eliminate the Immigration and Naturalization Service. 
The legislation will create a new Immigration Affairs Agency within the 
Justice Department, led by an Associate Attorney General for 
Immigration Affairs, that will contain two separate bureaus--The Bureau 
of Immigration Service and Adjudication (BISA) and the Bureau of 
Enforcement and Border Affairs (BEBA). This will allow for concentrated 
effort and personnel devoted to improving their respective service and 
enforcement functions. Inspections, which has a combined service and 
enforcement function, will be a separate entity within the Immigration 
Affairs Agency.
  The legislation would also increase accountability by creating three 
Senate-confirmed positions, one each for the Associate Attorney General 
for Immigration Affairs, the Director of the Service Bureau and the 
Director of the Enforcement Bureau. The bill would also create the 
position of Chief Financial Officer in both the Service and Enforcement 
bureaus, creating additional fiscal accountability.
  The bill will ensure the coordination of important functions. 
Specifically, by ensuring that an Associate Attorney General for 
Immigration Affairs will be in charge, the formulation and coordination 
of policy between the Service and Enforcement Bureaus will take place. 
There is a risk that without an individual charged with policy 
coordination, policy anarchy could ensue.
  The legislation will provide for enhanced enforcement of our 
immigration laws. Separating out enforcement will help ensure that 
enforcement is sufficiently supported and that individuals overseeing 
enforcement functions possess a law enforcement background. Moreover, 
the bill would move the Enforcement Bureau toward the best practices of 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is considered a more 
effective law enforcement entity than the current INS. The FBI is 
successful in coordinating activities between the central office and 
field offices and in supporting agents in the fields, which are vital 
for sound law enforcement. Finally, the bill would require the addition 
of 1,000 more border patrol in fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004.
  The INS Reform and Border Security Act should result in important 
service improvements. Separating service and enforcement will help 
ensure that those individuals working in the service side understand 
their jobs to include the fair, equitable, accurate, and courteous 
service. In fact, the legislation requires that all employee 
evaluations include the fair and equitable treatment of immigrants as a 
top priority. The legislation creates the Office of the Ombudsman, 
which will assist individuals in resolving service or case problems and 
identify and propose changes in the Service Bureau to improve service. 
The Ombudsman can appoint local representatives to resolve serious 
service breakdowns. In addition, the legislation models the Service 
Bureau's organization on the Social Security Administration by creating 
regional commissioners and area directors charged with service 
implementation. The bill would place statutory time limits on the 
processing of temporary visas and visas for permanent residence and 
seeks to ensure that services are adequately funded.
  To improve the culture of employees, the bill includes a series of 
measures, including employee buyouts and the ability to bring in 
outside management executives, that are modeled on those passed by 
Congress in the 1998 IRS reform bill.
  The legislation has already achieved a great consensus, having been 
endorsed by the U.S. Border Patrol Chief Patrol Agent's Association, 
the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the American 
Immigration Lawyers Association, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, and 
other organizations.
  In particular, I would like to thank my cosponsors Senators Kennedy 
and Hagel for working with on this important piece of legislation. I 
ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1563

       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 ``INS Reform 
     and Border Security Act of 1999''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Immigration laws of the United States defined.

                  TITLE I--IMMIGRATION AFFAIRS AGENCY

Sec. 101. Establishment of Immigration Affairs Agency.
Sec. 102. Establishment of the Office of the Associate Attorney General 
              for Immigration Affairs.
Sec. 103. Establishment of Bureau of Immigration Services and 
              Adjudications.
Sec. 104. Office of Ombudsman within the Service Bureau.
Sec. 105. Establishment of Bureau of Enforcement and Border Affairs.
Sec. 106. Exercise of authorities.
Sec. 107. Savings provisions.
Sec. 108. Transfer and allocation of appropriations and personnel.
Sec. 109. Executive Office for Immigration Review and Attorney General 
              litigation authorities not affected.
Sec. 110. Definitions.
Sec. 111. Effective date.

                   TITLE II--PERSONNEL FLEXIBILITIES

Sec. 201. Improvements in personnel flexibilities.
Sec. 202. Voluntary separation incentive payments.
Sec. 203. Basis for evaluation of Immigration Affairs Agency employees.
Sec. 204. Employee training program.
Sec. 205. Effective date.

[[Page 19980]]

                    TITLE III--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Expedited processing of documents.
Sec. 302. Funding adjudication and naturalization services.
Sec. 303. Increase in Border Patrol agents and support personnel.

     SEC. 2. IMMIGRATION LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES DEFINED.

       In this Act, the term ``immigration laws of the United 
     States'' means the following:
       (1) The Immigration and Nationality Act.
       (2) The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
     Responsibility Act of 1996.
       (3) The Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections 
     Act of 1994.
       (4) The Immigration Act of 1990.
       (5) The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
       (6) The Refugee Act of 1980.
       (7) Such other statutes, Executive orders, regulations, or 
     directives that relate to the admission to, detention in, or 
     removal from the United States of aliens, or that otherwise 
     relate to the status of aliens in the United States.

                  TITLE I--IMMIGRATION AFFAIRS AGENCY

     SEC. 101. ESTABLISHMENT OF IMMIGRATION AFFAIRS AGENCY.

       (a) Establishment.--
       (1) In general.--There is established within the Department 
     of Justice the Immigration Affairs Agency (in this Act 
     referred to as the ``Agency'').
       (2) Components.--The Agency shall consist of--
       (A) the Office of the Associate Attorney General for 
     Immigration Affairs established in section 102;
       (B) the Bureau of Immigration Services and Adjudications 
     established in section 103; and
       (C) the Bureau of Enforcement and Border Affairs 
     established in section 105.
       (b) Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs.--
       (1) In general.--The Agency shall be headed by an Associate 
     Attorney General for Immigration Affairs, who shall be 
     appointed by the President, by and with the advice and 
     consent of the Senate.
       (2) Compensation at rate of pay for executive level iii.--
     Section 5314 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs, 
     Department of Justice.''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--(A) Section 103(c) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act is amended--
       (i) by striking the first sentence; and
       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``He'' and 
     inserting ``The Associate Attorney General for Immigration 
     Affairs''.
       (B) Section 103 of such Act is amended by striking 
     ``Commissioner'' and inserting ``Associate Attorney General 
     for Immigration Affairs''.
       (C) Section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking the following:
       ``Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization, 
     Department of Justice.''.
       (c) Repeals.--The following provisions of law are repealed:
       (1) Section 4 of the Act of February 14, 1903, as amended 
     (32 Stat. 826; relating to the establishment of the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service).
       (2) Section 7 of the Act of March 3, 1891, as amended (26 
     Stat. 1085; relating to the establishment of the office of 
     the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization).
       (3) Section 201 of the Act of June 20, 1956 (70 Stat. 307; 
     relating to the compensation of assistant commissioners and 
     district director).
       (4) Section 1 of March 2, 1895 (28 Stat. 780; relating to 
     special immigrant inspectors).
       (d) References.--Except as otherwise provided in sections 
     103 and 105, any reference in any statute, reorganization 
     plan, Executive order, regulation, agreement, determination, 
     or other official document or proceeding to the Immigration 
     and Naturalization Service shall be deemed to refer to the 
     Immigration Affairs Agency.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Agency such sums as may be necessary to carry out its 
     functions.
       (2) Availability of funds.--Amounts appropriated pursuant 
     to paragraph (1) are authorized to remain available until 
     expended.

     SEC. 102. OFFICE OF THE ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR 
                   IMMIGRATION AFFAIRS.

       (a) Policy and Administrative Functions Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``immigration policy and administrative 
     functions'' includes the following functions under the 
     immigration laws of the United States:
       (1) Inspections at ports of entry in the United States.
       (2) Policy and planning formulation on immigration matters.
       (3) Information technology, information resources 
     management, and maintenance of records and databases, and the 
     coordination of records and other information of the two 
     bureaus within the Agency.
       (4) Such other functions as involve providing resources and 
     other support for the Bureau of Immigration Services and 
     Adjudications (established in section 103) and the Bureau of 
     Enforcement and Border Affairs (established in section 105).
       (b) Establishment of Office.--
       (1) In general.--There is established within the Agency the 
     Office of the Associate Attorney General for Immigration 
     Affairs (in this title referred to as the ``Office'').
       (2) General counsel.--
       (A) In general.--There shall be within the Office of the 
     Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs a General 
     Counsel, who shall be appointed by the Attorney General.
       (B) Compensation.--Section 5316 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``General Counsel, Immigration Affairs Agency.''.
       (3) Chief Financial Officer for the Immigration Affairs 
     Agency.--
       (A) In general.--There shall be a position of Chief 
     Financial Officer for the Immigration Affairs Agency and this 
     position shall be a career reserved position within the 
     Senior Executive Service and shall have the authorities and 
     functions described in section 902 of title 31, United States 
     Code, in relation to financial activities related to 
     immigration policy and administrative functions. For purposes 
     of section 902(a)(1) of such title, the Associate Attorney 
     General for Immigration Affairs shall be deemed to be the 
     head of the agency. The provisions of section 903 of such 
     title (relating to Deputy Chief Financial Officers) shall 
     also apply in the same manner as the previous sentence.
       (B) Compensation.--Section 5316 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``Chief Financial Officer, Immigration Affairs Agency.''.
       (c) Responsibilities of the Office.--Under the direction of 
     the Attorney General, the Office of the Associate Attorney 
     General for Immigration Affairs shall be responsible for 
     carrying out the immigration policy and administrative 
     functions of the Agency.
       (d) Delegation of Authority by the Attorney General.--All 
     immigration policy and administrative functions vested by 
     statute in, or exercised by--
       (1) the Attorney General, or
       (2) the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization, the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service, or officers, 
     employees, or components thereof,

     immediately prior to the effective date of this title shall 
     be exercised by the Attorney General through the Associate 
     Attorney General for Immigration Affairs.
       (e) References.--Any reference in any statute, 
     reorganization plan, Executive order, regulation, agreement, 
     determination, or other official document or proceeding to--
       (1) the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization or 
     any other officer or employee of the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service (insofar as such references refer to 
     any immigration policy and administrative function) shall be 
     deemed to refer to the Associate Attorney General for 
     Immigration Affairs; or
       (2) the Immigration and Naturalization Service (insofar as 
     such references refer to any immigration policy and 
     administrative function) shall be deemed to refer to the 
     Office of the Associate Attorney General for Immigration 
     Affairs.

     SEC. 103. ESTABLISHMENT OF BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION SERVICES AND 
                   ADJUDICATIONS.

       (a) Immigration Adjudication and Service Functions 
     Defined.--In this section, the term ``immigration 
     adjudication and service functions'' means the following 
     functions under the immigration laws of the United States:
       (1) Adjudications of nonimmigrant and immigrant visa 
     petitions.
       (2) Adjudications of naturalization petitions.
       (3) Adjudications of asylum and refugee applications.
       (4) Determinations concerning custody, parole, and 
     conditions of parole regarding applicants for asylum detained 
     at ports of entry who do not have prior nonpolitical criminal 
     records and who have been found to have a credible fear of 
     persecution, and responsibility for the detention of any such 
     applicant with respect to whom a determination has been made 
     that detention is required.
       (5) Adjudications performed at Service centers.
       (6) All other adjudications under the immigration laws of 
     the United States.
       (b) Establishment of Bureau.--
       (1) In general.--There is established within the Agency a 
     bureau to be known as the Bureau of Immigration Services and 
     Adjudications (in this section referred to as the ``Service 
     Bureau'').
       (2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the structure of the Service Bureau should be based on the 
     organization of the Social Security Administration.
       (3) Director.--The head of the Service Bureau shall be the 
     Director of Immigration Services and Adjudications who--
       (A) shall be appointed by the President, by and with the 
     advice and consent of the Senate; and
       (B) shall report directly to the Associate Attorney General 
     for Immigration Affairs.
       (4) Compensation at level iv of executive schedule.--
     Section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``Director of Immigration Services and Adjudications, 
     Immigration Affairs Agency.''.

[[Page 19981]]

       (c) Responsibilities of the Bureau.--Subject to the policy 
     guidance of the Associate Attorney General for Immigration 
     Affairs, the Service Bureau shall be responsible for carrying 
     out the immigration adjudication and service functions of the 
     Agency.
       (d) Delegation of Authority by the Attorney General.--All 
     immigration adjudication and service functions vested by 
     statute in, or exercised by--
       (1) the Attorney General, or
       (2) the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization, the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service, or officers, 
     employees, or components thereof,

     immediately prior to the effective date of this title shall 
     be exercised by the Attorney General through the Associate 
     Attorney General for Immigration Affairs and the Director of 
     the Service Bureau.
       (e) Chief Financial Officer for the Bureau of Immigration 
     Services and Adjudications.--
       (1) In general.--There shall be a position of Chief 
     Financial Officer for the Bureau of Immigration Services and 
     Adjudications and this position shall be a career reserved 
     position within the Senior Executive Service and shall have 
     the authorities and functions described in section 902 of 
     title 31, United States Code, in relation to financial 
     activities of the Service Bureau. For purposes of section 
     902(a)(1) of such title, the Director of the Service Bureau 
     shall be deemed to be the head of the agency. The provisions 
     of section 903 of such title (relating to Deputy Chief 
     Financial Officers) shall also apply to such Bureau in the 
     same manner as the previous sentence applies to such Bureau.
       (2) Compensation.--Section 5316 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``Chief Financial Officer, Bureau of Immigration Services 
     and Adjudications of the Immigration Affairs Agency.''.
       (f) Regional Commissioners.--There shall be within the 
     Service Bureau Regional Commissioners who shall be 
     responsible for carrying out the functions of the Bureau 
     within specified geographic regions. The Director of the 
     Service Bureau shall establish the number of Regional 
     Commissioners based on workload and economies of scale.
       (g) Area Directors.--The Director of the Service Bureau 
     shall appoint Area Directors who shall report to the Regional 
     Commissioner in his or her region. In States with large 
     populations there may be more than one Area Director. Each 
     Area Director is in charge of field offices within his or her 
     area.
       (h) Field Office Managers.--A Field Office Manager is in 
     charge of each field office. The field offices, located in 
     cities and other places around the country, are the Service 
     Bureau's main source of contact with the public. Congress 
     encourages the development of telephone service centers to 
     improve service and efficiency, which may or may not be 
     located in the same location as service centers under 
     subsection (k).
       (i) Term of Service.--No Field Office Manager or Area 
     Director may hold his or her post in a single geographic 
     region for more than 6 years without a break of at least 2 
     years. The Attorney General may waive this subsection for 
     extraordinary reasons.
       (j) Service Centers.--In addition, there shall be Service 
     Centers, located depending on the workloads and economies of 
     scale. The head of each Service Center shall report to the 
     Regional Commissioner in the region in which the Service 
     Center is situated.
       (k) Quality Assurance.--There shall be within the Service 
     Bureau an Office of Quality Assurance, modeled on the 
     corresponding office of the Social Security Administration, 
     that shall develop procedures and conduct audits to--
       (1) ensure that national policies are correctly 
     implemented;
       (2) determine whether Service Bureau policies or practices 
     result in poor file management or poor or inaccurate service; 
     and
       (3) report findings recommending corrective action to the 
     Director of the Service Bureau.
       (l) Office of Professional Responsibility.--There shall be 
     within the Service Bureau an Office of Professional 
     Responsibility that shall have the responsibility of 
     receiving charges of misconduct or ill treatment made by the 
     public and investigating the charges and providing an 
     appropriate remedy or disposition.
       (m) Training of Personnel.--The Director of the Service 
     Bureau, in consultation with the Associate Attorney General 
     for Immigration Affairs, shall have responsibility for the 
     training of all personnel of the Service Bureau.
       (n) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Service Bureau such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     its functions.
       (2) Availability of funds.--Amounts appropriated pursuant 
     to paragraph (1) are authorized to remain available until 
     expended.
       (o) References.--Any reference in any statute, 
     reorganization plan, Executive order, regulation, agreement, 
     determination, or other official document or proceeding to--
       (1) the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization or 
     any other officer or employee of the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service (insofar as such references refer to 
     any immigration adjudication and service function) shall be 
     deemed to refer to the Director of the Service Bureau; or
       (2) the Immigration and Naturalization Service (insofar as 
     such references refer to any immigration adjudication and 
     service function) shall be deemed to refer to the Service 
     Bureau.

     SEC. 104. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN WITHIN THE SERVICE BUREAU.

       (a) In General.--There is established within the Service 
     Bureau the Office of the Ombudsman, which shall be headed by 
     the Ombudsman.
       (b) Ombudsman.--
       (1) Appointment.--The Ombudsman shall be appointed by the 
     Director of the Service Bureau after consultation with the 
     Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs and 
     without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code,relating to appointments in the competitive service or 
     the Senior Executive Service. The Ombudsman shall report 
     directly to the Director of the Service Bureau.
       (2) Compensation.--The Ombudsman shall be entitled to 
     compensation at the same rate as the highest rate of basic 
     pay established for the Senior Executive Service under 
     section 5382 of title 5, United States Code, or, if the 
     Attorney General so determines, at a rate fixed under section 
     9503 of such title.
       (c) Functions of Office.--The functions of the Office of 
     the Ombudsman shall include to--
       (1) assist individuals in resolving service or case 
     problems with the Agency or Service Bureau;
       (2) identify areas in which individuals have problems in 
     dealings with the Immigration Affairs Agency or Service 
     Bureau;
       (3) to the extent possible, propose changes in the 
     administrative practices of the Agency or Service Bureau to 
     mitigate problems identified under paragraph (2);
       (4) monitor the coverage and geographic allocation of local 
     offices of the Service Bureau; and
       (5) ensure that the local telephone number for each local 
     office of the Service Bureau is published and available to 
     individuals served by the office.
       (e) Personnel Actions.--The Ombudsman shall have the 
     responsibility and authority to appoint local or regional 
     representatives of the Ombudsman's Office as in the 
     Ombudsman's judgment may be necessary to address and rectify 
     serious service problems.
       (f) Responsibilities of Director of the Service Bureau.--
     The Director of the Service Bureau shall establish procedures 
     requiring a formal response to all recommendations submitted 
     to the Director by the Ombudsman within 3 months after 
     submission of the Ombudsman's reports or recommendations. The 
     Director of the Service Bureau shall meet regularly with the 
     Ombudsman to identify and correct serious service problems.
       (g) Annual Reports.--
       (1) Objectives.--Not later than June 30 of each calendar 
     year, the Ombudsman shall report to the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
     on the Judiciary of the Senate on the objectives of the 
     Office of the Ombudsman for the fiscal year beginning in such 
     calendar year. Any such report shall contain full and 
     substantive analysis, in addition to statistical information.
       (2) Activities.--Not later than December 31 of each 
     calendar year, the Ombudsman shall submit a report to the 
     Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives 
     and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate on the 
     activities of the Ombudsman during the fiscal year ending in 
     that calendar year. Any such report shall contain a full and 
     substantive analysis, in addition to statistical information, 
     and shall--
       (A) identify the initiatives the Office of the Ombudsman 
     has taken on improving services and the responsiveness of the 
     Agency and the Service Bureau;
       (B) contain a summary of the most serious problems 
     encountered by individuals, including a description of the 
     nature of such problems;
       (C) contain an inventory of the items described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) for which action has been taken, 
     and the result of such action;
       (D) contain an inventory of the items described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) for which action remains to be 
     completed and the period during which each item has remained 
     on such inventory;
       (E) contain an inventory of the items described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) for which no action has been taken, 
     the period during which each item has remained on such 
     inventory, the reasons for the inaction, and identify any 
     Agency or Service Bureau official who is responsible for such 
     inaction;
       (F) contain recommendations as may be appropriate to 
     resolve problems encountered by individuals;
       (G) include such other information as the Ombudsman may 
     deem advisable.

     SEC. 105. ESTABLISHMENT OF BUREAU OF ENFORCEMENT AND BORDER 
                   AFFAIRS.

       (a) Immigration Enforcement Functions Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``immigration enforcement functions'' means 
     the following functions under the immigration laws of the 
     United States:
       (1) The Border Patrol program.

[[Page 19982]]

       (2) The detention program (except as specified in section 
     103(a)).
       (3) The deportation program.
       (4) The intelligence program.
       (5) The investigations program.
       (b) Establishment of Bureau.--
       (1) In general.--There is established within the Agency a 
     bureau to be known as the Bureau of Enforcement and Border 
     Affairs (in this section referred to as the ``Enforcement 
     Bureau'').
       (2) Enforcement bureau.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Enforcement Bureau be organized in accordance with the 
     ``best practices'' of other federal law enforcement agencies, 
     including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug 
     Enforcement Agency.
       (3) Director.--The head of the Enforcement Bureau shall be 
     the Director of the Bureau of Enforcement and Border Affairs 
     who--
       (A) shall be appointed by the President, by and with the 
     advice and consent of the Senate; and
       (B) shall report directly to the Associate Attorney General 
     for Immigration Affairs.
       (4) Compensation at level iv of executive schedule.--
     Section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``Director of Enforcement and Border Affairs, Immigration 
     Affairs Agency.''.
       (c) Responsibilities of the Bureau.--Subject to the policy 
     guidance of the Associate Attorney General for Immigration 
     Affairs, the Enforcement Bureau shall be responsible for 
     carrying out the immigration enforcement functions of the 
     Agency.
       (d) Delegation of Authority by the Attorney General.--All 
     immigration enforcement functions vested by statute in, or 
     exercised by--
       (1) the Attorney General, or
       (2) the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization, the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service, or officers, 
     employees, or components thereof,

     immediately prior to the effective date of this title shall 
     be exercised by the Attorney General through the Associate 
     Attorney General for Immigration Affairs and the Director of 
     the Enforcement Bureau.
       (e) Chief Financial Officer for the Bureau of Enforcement 
     and Border Affairs.--
       (1) In general.--There shall be a position of Chief 
     Financial Officer for the Bureau of Enforcement and Border 
     Affairs and this position shall be a career reserved position 
     within the Senior Executive Service and shall have the 
     authorities and functions described in section 902 of title 
     31, United States Code, in relation to financial activities 
     of the Enforcement Bureau. For purposes of section 902(a)(1) 
     of such title, the Director of the Enforcement Bureau shall 
     be deemed to be the head of the agency. The provisions of 
     section 903 of such title (relating to Deputy Chief Financial 
     Officers) shall also apply to such Bureau in the same manner 
     as the previous sentence applies to such Bureau.
       (2) Compensation.--Section 5316 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``Chief Financial Officer, Bureau of Enforcement and Border 
     Affairs of the Immigration Affairs Agency.''.
       (f) Organization.--The Director of the Enforcement Bureau 
     shall establish field offices in major cities and regions of 
     the United States. The locations shall be selected according 
     to trends in illegal immigration, alien smuggling, criminal 
     aliens, the need for regional centralization, and the need to 
     manage resources efficiently. Field offices shall also 
     establish satellite offices as needed.
       (g) Office of Professional Responsibility.--There shall be 
     within the Enforcement Bureau an Office of Professional 
     Responsibility that shall have the responsibility of 
     receiving charges of misconduct or ill treatment made by the 
     public and investigating the charges and providing an 
     appropriate remedy or disposition.
       (h) Training of Personnel.--The Director of the Enforcement 
     Bureau, in consultation with the Associate Attorney General 
     for Immigration Affairs, shall have responsibility for 
     determining the law enforcement training for all personnel of 
     the Enforcement Bureau.
       (i) References.--Any reference in any statute, 
     reorganization plan, Executive order, regulation, agreement, 
     determination, or other official document or proceeding to--
       (1) the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization or 
     any other officer or employee of the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service (insofar as such references refer to 
     any immigration enforcement function) shall be deemed to 
     refer to the Director of the Enforcement Bureau; or
       (2) the Immigration and Naturalization Service (insofar as 
     such references refer to any immigration enforcement 
     function) shall be deemed to refer to the Enforcement Bureau.
       (j) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Enforcement Bureau such sums as may be necessary to carry 
     out its functions.
       (2) Availability of funds.--Amounts appropriated pursuant 
     to paragraph (1) are authorized to remain available until 
     expended.

     SEC. 106. EXERCISE OF AUTHORITIES.

       Except as otherwise provided by law, a Federal official to 
     whom a function is transferred pursuant to this title may, 
     for purposes of performing the function, exercise all 
     authorities under any other provision of law that were 
     available with respect to the performance of that function to 
     the official responsible for the performance of the function 
     immediately before the effective date of the transfer of the 
     function pursuant to this title.

     SEC. 107. SAVINGS PROVISIONS.

       (a) Legal Documents.--All orders, determinations, rules, 
     regulations, permits, grants, loans, contracts, agreements, 
     certificates, licenses, and privileges--
       (1) that have been issued, made, granted, or allowed to 
     become effective by the President, the Attorney General, the 
     Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 
     their delegates, or any other Government official, or by a 
     court of competent jurisdiction, in the performance of any 
     function that is transferred pursuant to this title; and
       (2) that are in effect on the effective date of such 
     transfer (or become effective after such date pursuant to 
     their terms as in effect on such effective date);

     shall continue in effect according to their terms until 
     modified, terminated, superseded, set aside, or revoked in 
     accordance with law by the President, any other authorized 
     official, a court of competent jurisdiction, or operation of 
     law.
       (b) Proceedings.--Sections 101 through 105 and this section 
     shall not affect any proceedings or any application for any 
     benefits, service, license, permit, certificate, or financial 
     assistance pending on the effective date of this title before 
     an office whose functions are transferred pursuant to this 
     title, but such proceedings and applications shall be 
     continued. Orders shall be issued in such proceedings, 
     appeals shall be taken therefrom, and payments shall be made 
     pursuant to such orders, as if this Act had not been enacted, 
     and orders issued in any such proceeding shall continue in 
     effect until modified, terminated, superseded, or revoked by 
     a duly authorized official, by a court of competent 
     jurisdiction, or by operation of law. Nothing in this section 
     shall be considered to prohibit the discontinuance or 
     modification of any such proceeding under the same terms and 
     conditions and to the same extent that such proceeding could 
     have been discontinued or modified if this section had not 
     been enacted.
       (c) Suits.--This title shall not affect suits commenced 
     before the effective date of this title, and in all such 
     suits, proceeding shall be had, appeals taken, and judgments 
     rendered in the same manner and with the same effect as if 
     this title had not been enacted.
       (d) Nonabatement of Actions.--No suit, action, or other 
     proceeding commenced by or against the Department of Justice 
     or the Immigration and Naturalization Service, or by or 
     against any individual in the official capacity of such 
     individual as an officer or employee in connection with a 
     function transferred pursuant to this section, shall abate by 
     reason of the enactment of this Act.
       (e) Continuance of Suits.--If any Government officer in the 
     official capacity of such officer is party to a suit with 
     respect to a function of the officer, and pursuant to this 
     title such function is transferred to any other officer or 
     office, then such suit shall be continued with the other 
     officer or the head of such other office, as applicable, 
     substituted or added as a party.
       (f) Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review.--Except 
     as otherwise provided by this title, any statutory 
     requirements relating to notice, hearings, action upon the 
     record, or administrative or judicial review that apply to 
     any function transferred pursuant to this title shall apply 
     to the exercise of such function by the head of the office, 
     and other officers of the office, to which such function is 
     transferred pursuant to such section.

     SEC. 108. TRANSFER AND ALLOCATION OF APPROPRIATIONS AND 
                   PERSONNEL.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Transfers.--The personnel of the Department of Justice 
     employed in connection with the functions transferred 
     pursuant to this title (and functions that the Attorney 
     General determines are properly related to the functions of 
     the Office, the Service Bureau, or the Enforcement Bureau 
     would, if so transferred, further the purposes of the Office 
     and the respective Bureau), and the assets, liabilities, 
     contracts, property, records, and unexpended balance of 
     appropriations, authorizations, allocations, and other funds 
     employed, held, used, arising from, available to, or to be 
     made available to the Immigration and Naturalization Service 
     in connection with the functions transferred pursuant to this 
     title, subject to section 202 of the Budget and Accounting 
     Procedures Act of 1950, shall be transferred to the Office or 
     the Bureau, as the case may be, for appropriate allocation by 
     the Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs for 
     the Office or the Bureau, as the case may be. Unexpended 
     funds transferred pursuant to this subsection shall be used 
     only for the purposes for which the funds were originally 
     authorized and appropriated. The Attorney General shall 
     retain the right to adjust or realign transfers

[[Page 19983]]

     of funds and personnel effected pursuant to this title for a 
     period of 2 years after the date of the establishment of the 
     Agency.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     the transfers made pursuant to this title.
       (b) Delegation and Assignment.--Except as otherwise 
     expressly prohibited by law or otherwise provided in this 
     title, the Associate Attorney General for Immigration 
     Affairs, the Director of the Service Bureau, and the Director 
     of the Enforcement Bureau to whom functions are transferred 
     pursuant to this title may delegate any of the functions so 
     transferred to such officers and employees of the Office of 
     the Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs, the 
     Service Bureau, and the Enforcement Bureau, respectively, as 
     the Associate Attorney General or such Director may 
     designate, and may authorize successive redelegations of such 
     functions as may be necessary or appropriate. No delegation 
     of functions under this subsection or under any other 
     provision of this title shall relieve the official to whom a 
     function is transferred pursuant to this title of 
     responsibility for the administration of the function.
       (c) Authorities of Attorney General.--
       (1) Incidental transfers.--The Attorney General (or a 
     delegate of the Attorney General), at such time or times as 
     the Attorney General (or the delegate) shall provide, may 
     make such determinations as may be necessary with regard to 
     the functions transferred pursuant to this title, and to make 
     such additional incidental dispositions of personnel, assets, 
     liabilities, grants, contracts, property, records, and 
     unexpended balances of appropriations, authorizations, 
     allocations, and other funds held, used, arising from, 
     available to, or to be made available in connection with such 
     functions, as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of 
     this title. The Attorney General shall provide for such 
     further measures and dispositions as may be necessary to 
     effectuate the purposes of this title.
       (2) Treatment of shared resources.--
       (A) In general.--The Associate Attorney General for 
     Immigration Affairs is authorized to provide for an 
     appropriate allocation, or coordination, or both, of 
     resources involved in supporting shared support functions for 
     the Office, the Service Bureau, the Enforcement Bureau, and 
     offices within the Department of Justice. The Associate 
     Attorney General for Immigration Affairs shall maintain 
     oversight and control over the shared computer databases and 
     systems and records management.
       (B) Databases.--The Associate Attorney General for 
     Immigration Affairs, with the assistance of the Attorney 
     General, shall ensure that the Immigration Affairs Agency's 
     databases and those of the Service Bureau and the Enforcement 
     Bureau are integrated with the databases of the Executive 
     Office for Immigration Review in such a way as to permit--
       (i) the electronic docketing of each case by date of 
     service upon an alien of the notice to appear in the case of 
     a removal proceeding (or an order to show cause in the case 
     of a deportation proceeding); and
       (ii) the tracking of the status of any alien throughout the 
     alien's contact with United States immigration authorities 
     without regard to whether the entity with jurisdiction over 
     the alien is the Immigration Affairs Agency, the Service 
     Bureau, the Enforcement Bureau, or the Executive Office for 
     Immigration Review.

     SEC. 109. EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW AND 
                   ATTORNEY GENERAL LITIGATION AUTHORITIES NOT 
                   AFFECTED.

       Nothing in this title may be construed to authorize or 
     require the transfer or delegation of any function vested in, 
     or exercised by--
       (1) the Executive Office for Immigration Review of the 
     Department of Justice, or any officer, employee, or component 
     thereof, or
       (2) the Attorney General with respect to the institution of 
     any prosecution, or the institution or defense of any action 
     or appeal, in any court of the United States established 
     under Article III of the Constitution,
     immediately prior to the effective date of this title.

     SEC. 110. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this title:
       (1) Function.--The term ``function'' includes any duty, 
     obligation, power, authority, responsibility, right, 
     privilege, activity, or program.
       (2) Office.--The term ``office'' includes any office, 
     administration, agency, bureau, institute, council, unit, 
     organizational entity, or component thereof.

     SEC. 111. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This title, and the amendments made by this title, shall 
     take effect 18 months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.

                   TITLE II--PERSONNEL FLEXIBILITIES

     SEC. 201. IMPROVEMENTS IN PERSONNEL FLEXIBILITIES.

       (a) In General.--Part III of title 5, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new subpart:

           ``Subpart J--Immigration Affairs Agency Personnel

   ``CHAPTER 96--PERSONNEL FLEXIBILITIES RELATING TO THE IMMIGRATION 
                             AFFAIRS AGENCY

``Sec.
``9601. Immigration Affairs Agency personnel flexibilities.
``9602. Pay authority for critical positions.
``9603. Streamlined critical pay authority.
``9604. Recruitment, retention, relocation incentives, and relocation 
              expenses.
``9605. Performance awards for senior executives.

     ``Sec. 9601. Immigration Affairs Agency personnel 
       flexibilities

       ``(a) Any flexibilities provided by sections 9602 through 
     9610 of this chapter shall be exercised in a manner 
     consistent with--
       ``(1) chapter 23 (relating to merit system principles and 
     prohibited personnel practices);
       ``(2) provisions relating to preference eligibles;
       ``(3) except as otherwise specifically provided, section 
     5307 (relating to the aggregate limitation on pay);
       ``(4) except as otherwise specifically provided, chapter 71 
     (relating to labor-management relations); and
       ``(5) subject to subsections (b) and (c) of section 1104, 
     as though such authorities were delegated to the Attorney 
     General under section 1104(a)(2).
       ``(b) The Attorney General shall provide the Office of 
     Personnel Management with any information that Office 
     requires in carrying out its responsibilities under this 
     section.
       ``(c) Employees within a unit to which a labor organization 
     is accorded exclusive recognition under chapter 71 shall not 
     be subject to any flexibility provided by sections 9607 
     through 9610 of this chapter unless the exclusive 
     representative and the Immigration Affairs Agency have 
     entered into a written agreement which specifically provides 
     for the exercise of that flexibility. Such written agreement 
     may be imposed by the Federal Services Impasses Panel under 
     section 7119.

     ``Sec. 9602. Pay authority for critical positions

       ``(a) When the Attorney General seeks a grant of authority 
     under section 5377 for critical pay for 1 or more positions 
     at the Immigration Affairs Agency, the Office of Management 
     and Budget may fix the rate of basic pay, notwithstanding 
     sections 5377(d)(2) and 5307, at any rate up to the salary 
     set in accordance with section 104 of title 3.
       ``(b) Notwithstanding section 5307, no allowance, 
     differential, bonus, award, or similar cash payment may be 
     paid to any employee receiving critical pay at a rate fixed 
     under subsection (a), in any calendar year if, or to the 
     extent that, the employee's total annual compensation will 
     exceed the maximum amount of total annual compensation 
     payable at the salary set in accordance with section 104 of 
     title 3.

     ``Sec. 9603. Streamlined critical pay authority

       ``(a) Notwithstanding section 9602, and without regard to 
     the provisions of this title governing appointments in the 
     competitive service or the Senior Executive Service and 
     chapters 51 and 53 (relating to classification and pay 
     rates), the Attorney General may, for a period of 10 years 
     after the date of enactment of this section, establish, fix 
     the compensation of, and appoint individuals to, designated 
     critical administrative, technical, and professional 
     positions needed to carry out the functions of the 
     Immigration Affairs Agency, if--
       ``(1) the positions--
       ``(A) require expertise of an extremely high level in an 
     administrative, technical, or professional field; and
       ``(B) are critical to the Immigration Affairs Agency's 
     successful accomplishment of an important mission;
       ``(2) exercise of the authority is necessary to recruit or 
     retain an individual exceptionally well qualified for the 
     position;
       ``(3) the number of such positions does not exceed 40 at 
     any one time;
       ``(4) designation of such positions are approved by the 
     Attorney General;
       ``(5) the terms of such appointments are limited to no more 
     than 4 years;
       ``(6) appointees to such positions were not Immigration 
     Affairs Agency employees prior to July 1, 1999;
       ``(7) total annual compensation for any appointee to such 
     positions does not exceed the highest total annual 
     compensation payable at the rate determined under section 104 
     of title 3; and
       ``(8) all such positions are excluded from the collective 
     bargaining unit.
       ``(b) Individuals appointed under this section shall not be 
     considered to be employees for purposes of subchapter II of 
     chapter 75.

     ``Sec. 9604. Recruitment, retention, relocation incentives, 
       and relocation expenses

       ``(a) For a period of 10 years after the date of enactment 
     of this section and subject to approval by the Office of 
     Personnel Management, the Attorney General may provide for 
     variations from sections 5753 and 5754 governing payment of 
     recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives.
       ``(b) For a period of 10 years after the date of enactment 
     of this section, the Attorney General may pay from 
     appropriations made to the Immigration Affairs Agency 
     allowable relocation expenses under section 5724a for

[[Page 19984]]

     employees transferred or reemployed and allowable travel and 
     transportation expenses under section 5723 for new 
     appointees, for any new appointee appointed to a position for 
     which pay is fixed under section 9602 or 9603 after July 1, 
     1999.

     ``Sec. 9605. Performance awards for senior executives

       ``(a) For a period of 10 years after the date of enactment 
     of this section, Immigration Affairs Agency senior executives 
     who have program management responsibility over significant 
     functions of the Immigration Affairs Agency may be paid a 
     performance bonus without regard to the limitation in section 
     5384(b)(2) if the Attorney General finds such award warranted 
     based on the executive's performance.
       ``(b) In evaluating an executive's performance for purposes 
     of an award under this section, the Attorney General shall 
     take into account the executive's contributions toward the 
     successful accomplishment of goals and objectives established 
     under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and 
     other performance metrics or plans established in 
     consultation with the Attorney General.
       ``(c) Any award in excess of 20 percent of an executive's 
     rate of basic pay shall be approved by the Attorney General.
       ``(d) Notwithstanding section 5384(b)(3), the Attorney 
     General shall determine the aggregate amount of performance 
     awards available to be paid during any fiscal year under this 
     section and section 5384 to career senior executives in the 
     Immigration Affairs Agency. Such amount may not exceed an 
     amount equal to 5 percent of the aggregate amount of basic 
     pay paid to career senior executives in the Immigration 
     Affairs Agency during the preceding fiscal year. The 
     Immigration Affairs Agency shall not be included in the 
     determination under section 5384(b)(3) of the aggregate 
     amount of performance awards payable to career senior 
     executives in the Department of the Justice other than the 
     Immigration Affairs Agency.
       ``(e) Notwithstanding section 5307, a performance bonus 
     award may not be paid to an executive in a calendar year if, 
     or to the extent that, the executive's total annual 
     compensation will exceed the maximum amount of total annual 
     compensation payable at the rate determined under section 104 
     of title 3.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for part III 
     of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new items:

           ``Subpart J--Immigration Affairs Agency Personnel

``96. Personnel flexibilities relating to the Immigration Affairs 
    Agency.................................................9601.''.....

     SEC. 202. VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.

       (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``employee'' 
     means an employee (as defined by section 2105 of title 5, 
     United States Code) who is employed by the Immigration 
     Affairs Agency serving under an appointment without time 
     limitation, and has been currently employed for a continuous 
     period of at least 3 years, but does not include--
       (1) a reemployed annuitant under subchapter III of chapter 
     83 or chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code, or another 
     retirement system;
       (2) an employee having a disability on the basis of which 
     such employee is or would be eligible for disability 
     retirement under the applicable retirement system referred to 
     in paragraph (1);
       (3) an employee who is in receipt of a specific notice of 
     involuntary separation for misconduct or unacceptable 
     performance;
       (4) an employee who, upon completing an additional period 
     of service as referred to in section 3(b)(2)(B)(ii) of the 
     Federal Workforce Restructuring Act of 1994 (5 U.S.C. 5597 
     note), would qualify for a voluntary separation incentive 
     payment under section 3 of such Act;
       (5) an employee who has previously received any voluntary 
     separation incentive payment by the Federal Government under 
     this section or any other authority and has not repaid such 
     payment;
       (6) an employee covered by statutory reemployment rights 
     who is on transfer to another organization; or
       (7) any employee who, during the 24-month period preceding 
     the date of separation, has received a recruitment or 
     relocation bonus under section 5753 of title 5, United States 
     Code, or who, within the 12-month period preceding the date 
     of separation, received a retention allowance under section 
     5754 of title 5, United States Code.
       (b) Authority To Provide Voluntary Separation Incentive 
     Payments.--
       (1) In general.--The Associate Attorney General for 
     Immigration Affairs may pay voluntary separation incentive 
     payments under this section to any employee to the extent 
     necessary to carry out the plan to reorganize the Immigration 
     Affairs Agency under title I.
       (2) Amount and treatment of payments.--A voluntary 
     separation incentive payment--
       (A) shall be paid in a lump sum after the employee's 
     separation;
       (B) shall be paid from appropriations or funds available 
     for the payment of the basic pay of the employees;
       (C) shall be equal to the lesser of--
       (i) an amount equal to the amount the employee would be 
     entitled to receive under section 5595(c) of title 5, United 
     States Code; or
       (ii) an amount determined by an agency head not to exceed 
     $25,000;
       (D) may not be made except in the case of any qualifying 
     employee who voluntarily separates (whether by retirement or 
     resignation) before January 1, 2003;
       (E) shall not be a basis for payment, and shall not be 
     included in the computation, of any other type of Government 
     benefit; and
       (F) shall not be taken into account in determining the 
     amount of any severance pay to which the employee may be 
     entitled under section 5595 of title 5, United States Code, 
     based on any other separation.
       (c) Additional Immigration Affairs Agency Contributions to 
     the Retirement Fund.--
       (1) In general.--In addition to any other payments which it 
     is required to make under subchapter III of chapter 83 of 
     title 5, United States Code, the Immigration Affairs Agency 
     shall remit to the Office of Personnel Management for deposit 
     in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the 
     Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund an amount equal 
     to 15 percent of the final basic pay of each employee who is 
     covered under subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 84 of 
     title 5, United States Code, to whom a voluntary separation 
     incentive has been paid under this section.
       (2) Definition.--In paragraph (1), the term ``final basic 
     pay'', with respect to an employee, means the total amount of 
     basic pay which would be payable for a year of service by 
     such employee, computed using the employee's final rate of 
     basic pay, and, if last serving on other than a full-time 
     basis, with appropriate adjustment therefore.
       (d) Effect of Subsequent Employment With the Government.--
     An individual who has received a voluntary separation 
     incentive payment under this section and accepts any 
     employment for compensation with the Government of the United 
     States, or who works for any agency of the United States 
     Government through a personal services contract, within 5 
     years after the date of the separation on which the payment 
     is based, shall be required to pay, prior to the individual's 
     first day of employment, the entire amount of the incentive 
     payment to the Immigration Affairs Agency.
       (e) Use of Voluntary Separations.--The Immigration Affairs 
     Agency may redeploy or use the full-time equivalent positions 
     vacated by voluntary separations under this section to make 
     other positions available to more critical locations or more 
     critical occupations.

     SEC. 203. BASIS FOR EVALUATION OF IMMIGRATION AFFAIRS AGENCY 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Fair and Equitable Treatment.--The Immigration Affairs 
     Agency shall use the fair and equitable treatment of aliens 
     by employees as one of the standards for evaluating employee 
     performance.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to 
     evaluations conducted on or after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 204. EMPLOYEE TRAINING PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     effective date of this Act, the Director of the Service 
     Bureau and the Director of the Enforcement Bureau, in 
     consultation with the Associate Attorney General for 
     Immigration Affairs, shall each implement an employee 
     training program for the personnel of their respective 
     bureaus and shall each submit an employee training plan to 
     the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the 
     Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
       (b) Contents.--The plan submitted under subsection (a) 
     shall--
       (1) detail a schedule for training and the fiscal years 
     during which the training will occur;
       (2) detail the funding of the program and relevant 
     information to demonstrate the priority and commitment of 
     resources to the plan;
       (3) with respect to the Service Bureau, after consultation 
     by the Associate Attorney General for Immigration Affairs 
     with the Director of the Service Bureau, detail a 
     comprehensive employee training program to ensure adequate 
     customer service training;
       (4) detail any joint training of both Service Bureau and 
     Enforcement Bureau personnel in appropriate areas;
       (5) review the organizational design of customer service; 
     and
       (6) provide for the implementation of a performance 
     development system.

     SEC. 205. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided in this title, this title, and 
     the amendments made by this title, shall take effect 18 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act.

                    TITLE III--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. EXPEDITED PROCESSING OF DOCUMENTS.

       (a) 30-Day Processing of ``H-1B'', ``L'', ``O'', or ``P-1'' 
     Nonimmigrants.--Section 214(c)(1) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(1)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following: ``The Attorney General shall provide a 
     process for reviewing and acting upon petitions under this 
     subsection

[[Page 19985]]

     with respect to nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15) 
     (H)(i)(b), (L), (O), or (P)(i) within 30 days after the date 
     a completed petition has been filed.''.
       (b) 30-Day Processing of ``R'' Nonimmigrants.--Section 
     214(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1184(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(10) The Attorney General shall provide a process for 
     reviewing and acting upon petitions under the subsection with 
     respect to nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15)(R) 
     within 30 days after the date a completed petition has been 
     filed.''.
       (c) 60-Day Processing of Immigrants.--Section 204 of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) The Attorney General shall provide a process for 
     reviewing and acting upon petitions under this section within 
     60 days after the date a completed petition has been filed 
     under this section.''.
       (d) 90-Day Processing of Adjustment of Status 
     Applications.--Section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(l) The Attorney General shall provide a process for 
     reviewing and acting upon petitions under this subsection 
     within 90 days after the date a completed petition has been 
     filed.''.
       (e) 90-Day Processing of Immigrant Visa Applications.--
     Section 222 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1202) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(h) The Secretary of State shall provide a process for 
     reviewing and acting upon petitions under this section within 
     90 days after the date a completed application has been 
     filed.''.
       (f) Reentry Permits.--Section 223 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1203) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Exception.--No permit shall be required for a 
     permanent resident who is transferred abroad temporarily as a 
     result of employment with a United States employer or its 
     overseas parent, subsidiary, or affiliate.''.
       (g) Electronic Filing.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall 
     establish a demonstration project regarding the feasibility 
     of electronic filing of petitions with respect to 
     nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15) (H), (L), (O), 
     (P)(i), or (R) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The 
     demonstration project shall utilize a representative number 
     of employers who seek to employ those nonimmigrants. The 
     demonstration project shall make provision for payment by the 
     employer of related fees through the establishment of an 
     account with the Immigration and Naturalization Service or 
     through a credit card. Within 2 years of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall consider 
     the feasibility of offering electronic filing to all 
     petitioners.''.
       (h) Report.--Section 214(c)(8) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(8)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(F) The average processing time of each such type of 
     petition shall be reported annually and quarterly.''.
       (i) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect 6 months after the effective date of Title 
     I.

     SEC. 302. FUNDING ADJUDICATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICES.

       Section 286(m) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1356(m)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``: Provided further,'' and all that 
     follows through ``immigrants.'' and inserting the following: 
     ``Each fee collected for the provision of an adjudication or 
     naturalization service may be used only to fund adjudication 
     or naturalization services or the costs of similar services 
     provided without charge to asylum or refugee applicants.''; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new sentences: 
     ``Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to modify the 
     conditions specified in section 286(s) for the expenditure of 
     the proceeds for the fee authorized under section 214(c)(9). 
     There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out the provisions of section 207 through 
     209 of this Act.''.

     SEC. 303. INCREASE IN BORDER PATROL AGENTS AND SUPPORT 
                   PERSONNEL.

       Section 101(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and 
     Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 is amended by striking 
     ``and 2001'' and inserting ``2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Bayh, and Mr. 
        Kerry):
  S. 1565. A bill to license America's Private Investment Companies and 
provide enhanced credit to stimulate private investment in low-income 
communities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, 
Housing, and Urban Affairs.


             america's private investment companies (apic)

 Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today 
legislation to establish ``America's Private Investment Companies,'' or 
APIC. This legislation is part of President Clinton's ``New Markets 
Initiative,'' which I am also pleased to be able to support.
  The New Markets Initiative, of which APIC is a crucial element, is an 
important response to economic problems that persist in many 
neighborhoods and communities in our urban and rural areas. These 
communities have been bypassed by the increased investment, job growth, 
and income increases that have characterized this unprecedented period 
of economic expansion. Indeed, the areas that would benefit from the 
New Markets Initiative are experiencing increased poverty levels, 
increased isolation, and ongoing joblessness and decay.
  Yet, research increasingly shows that most of these areas represent 
good economic opportunities for American business. Michael Porter, a 
renowned business analyst who has written widely on competitiveness at 
both the firm and national levels, has written that a

       . . . major advantage of the inner city as a business 
     location is a large, underserved local market. . . . In fact, 
     inner cities are the largest underserved market in America, 
     with many tens of billions of dollars of unmet consumer and 
     business demand.

  Another group called Social Compact has done intensive studies of 
buying power in a number of communities around the country. These 
studies confirm Porter's earlier work. Social Compact estimated retail 
spending power in two communities in Chicago. Residents in the first 
community have median incomes of over $67,000 million whereas the 
median income in the second community is under $30,000. Yet, on a per 
acre basis, the lower income community has more than twice the spending 
power of the wealthier area.
  Moreover, as labor markets grow tighter and tighter, inner cities 
have the advantage of an ``available, loyal workforce,'' to again quote 
Mr. Porter.
  However, we need a catalyst to encourage business to take advantage 
of these opportunities. The APIC program provides that push. This bill 
gives the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), together 
with the Small Business Administration (SBA), authority to provide low-
cost loans on a matching basis to specially constituted investment 
companies, called APICs, that raise private equity capital for 
investment in businesses in low-income areas.
  Individual APICs will operate in a manner similar to Small Business 
Investment Companies (SBICs), a very successful program that helps fund 
start up small business. APIC will target its investment funds to 
larger businesses that locate in these underserved areas, with 
particular emphasis on those businesses that create good jobs in those 
neighborhoods.
  The APIC program is essentially a private-sector venture in 
partnership with the public sector. The managers of the individual 
APICs will make the investment decisions according to the program goals 
and criteria. They will have their money, and the money of their 
investors, at risk, making the government's loan much more secure.
  This program requires a very small federal investment--just $36 
million in credit subsidy--to create an estimated $1 billion in debt 
financing available. This debt will, in turn, generate $500 million in 
private equity per year, or $7.5 billion over the next five years. 
APICs would use these funds, for example, to help a business establish 
a new back-office facility, factory, or distribution plant in a low 
income area. APICs could invest in the development of multi-tenant 
shopping centers, or in industrial parks. Combined with the New Market 
Tax Credit being introduced by my colleagues Senator Rockefeller and 
Senator Robb, APIC will help create important new economic 
opportunities in parts of America that have not yet been touched by the 
economic prosperity most of us enjoy.
  Mr. President, I ask that letters of support be printed in the 
Record.
  The letters follow:

                                New York City Investment Fund,

                                                   August 2, 1999.
     Senator Paul Sarbanes,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Sarbanes: We are writing in support of a new 
     initiative proposed by

[[Page 19986]]

     the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Small 
     Business Administration, known as America's Private 
     Investment Companies Bill. We have provided input into the 
     proposed legislation and believe that this bill could 
     leverage significant new private capital for investment in 
     communities that are not fully participating in our otherwise 
     thriving national economy.
       We established the New York City Investment Fund in 1996 to 
     stimulate business development and job-generating activities 
     across the five boroughs, with a particular emphasis on low 
     and moderate-income communities. Our investors include many 
     of the city's leading financial institutions, corporations 
     and business leaders, each of whom put up $1 million and 
     committed the resources of their organization to support our 
     work. With $80 million under management, the Fund has already 
     invested some $20 million in projects that will generate more 
     than 4,000 new jobs. Most important, we have mobilized the 
     city's business and financial leadership to become personally 
     involved with our portfolio projects, providing business 
     expertise and strategic alliances that are essential for 
     bringing disadvantaged communities into the economic 
     mainstream.
       Based on our experience, we can confirm that there is a 
     severe shortage of equity and debt financing for largescale 
     projects in low-income areas. Issues associated with site 
     assemblage, brownfields remediation, high construction costs 
     in urban centers, and low property appraisals in the inner 
     city all contribute to the need for federal incentives to 
     stimulate investment in job-generating development projects 
     targeted to these areas. At the same time, many existing 
     businesses operating in these areas cannot attract 
     conventional financing to modernize or expand. We have seen a 
     number of opportunities where our Fund's resources could have 
     been useful, but only if we could leverage additional risk 
     capital from other sources. The APIC program would be a 
     unique source of capital and partial loan guarantees that our 
     Fund could definitely put to work in the inner city 
     communities of New York for new development and retention/
     expansion of businesses that may otherwise disappear.
       We urge you to move this bill forward, in conjunction with 
     the proposed New Markets Tax Credit proposal, and express our 
     willingness to work with the federal government to carry out 
     the mission of APIC once it is enacted.
           Sincerely,
     Henry R. Kravis.
     Kathryn Wylde.
                                  ____

                                                 Local Initiatives


                                          Support Corporation,

                                                    July 30, 1999,
     Hon. Paul Sarbanes,
     U.S. Senate, Senate Committee on Banking and Financial 
         Services, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Sarbanes: Local Initiatives Support 
     Corporation strongly supports the proposed America's Private 
     Investment Companies (APICs) legislation and urges you to 
     make its enactment a priority. We believe that APICs, along 
     with their companion New Markets Tax Credits, offer the most 
     exciting opportunity in a generation for the economic 
     development of low-income urban and rural communities.
       LISC is the nation's largest nonprofit resource for low-
     income community development. In almost 20 years, LISC has 
     raised over $3 billion from the private sector to invest in 
     low-income urban and rural areas through nonprofit community 
     development corporations (CDCs). Last year alone, LISC 
     provided over $600 million through 41 local programs and a 
     national rural initiative.
       Each year more distressed communities are becoming ripe for 
     economic development. For example, LISC is involved in 20 
     major retail projects, at a total cost of $250 million, in 
     some of the toughest neighborhoods in America. Smart business 
     leaders are beginning to discover that these untapped markets 
     offer profitable opportunities. The expanding economy is one 
     reason. More important, though, have been the many years of 
     painstaking work rebuilding housing, removing blight, 
     reducing crime, and restoring confidence.
       We know from experience that this progress does not come 
     easily. Assembling land and constructing a modern business 
     facility are costly and time consuming, and arranging the 
     financing is difficult. But the payoff for communities and 
     the nation--in jobs, income, reinvestment, services, and 
     social stability--is well worth it.
       That's why APICs are the right idea at the right time. They 
     would help experienced community developers to mobilize 
     private capital to seize economic development activities. 
     These new instruments reflect what works--markets discipline, 
     private risk taking and decision making, and genuine 
     partnership among communities, business leaders, and 
     government. APICs would have to raise at least one dollar of 
     private equity investment to attract two dollars of federally 
     guaranteed loans. Moreover, the private investors would have 
     to lose their entire stake before any federally guarantee can 
     be called. This structure will generate prudent underwriting 
     without excessive government interference. The APICs 
     structure permits a modest $37 million in credit subsidies to 
     generate $1.5 billion in economic development--a remarkably 
     cost-effective federal investment.
       I hope you will enthusiastically support APICs and the New 
     Markets Tax Credits. We would be pleased to work with you on 
     this exciting agenda.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Michael Rubinger,
                    President and Chief Executive Officer.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD:
  S.J. Res. 31. A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States granting the President the authority 
to exercise an item veto of individual appropriations in an 
appropriations bill; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


              the line-item veto constitutional amendment

 Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, the federal budget is prominent 
right now as we discuss the spending policies that will guide Congress 
through the coming fiscal years. In the midst of these discussions, I 
would like to bring up an important issue that many members have 
supported in the past. I am here today to introduce a line-item veto 
constitutional amendment.
  Prior to my election to the Senate I served in the House of 
Representatives. In that body I introduced a constitutional line-item 
veto on several occasions. This was motivated by my view that the 
greatest threat to our economy was deficit spending which is still 
adding to the accumulated $5.6 trillion national debt. As a Member of 
the Senate, I introduced this legislation again in 1997. This occurred 
just after a Federal district court declared the enacted statutory 
line-item veto, or more accurately, enhanced rescission authority, to 
be unconstitutional.
  In 1996, Congress gave the President what is generally referred to as 
expanded rescission authority when it passed the Line Item Veto Act. 
All Presidents, beginning with George Washington, had impoundment 
authority similar to what the Line Item Veto Act intended until 
Congress limited rescission authority in 1974 under the Impoundment 
Control Act.
  Ultimately the Supreme Court upheld the district court ruling in 
Clinton v. City of New York, where the Line Item Veto Act was ruled 
unconstitutional on grounds that it violates the presentment clause. 
Now a presidential line-item veto can only be provided by amending the 
Constitution, and that is what I seek to do with this legislation.
  Governors in 43 states have some type of line item veto. This is 
consistent with the approach taken in most state constitutions of 
providing a greater level of detail concerning the budget process than 
is contained in the U.S. Constitution. In my view, the line item veto 
has been an important factor in the more responsible budgeting that 
occurs at the state level.
  Colorado gives line item veto authority to the governor, and that 
power, along with a balanced budget requirement in the state 
constitution, has worked well and insured that Colorado has been 
governed in a fiscally responsible manner regardless of who served in 
the legislature or in the governor's office.
  I believe it is time that we take the approach of the states. In 
order to do this we must enact a Constitutional Amendment. Under 
article I, section 7 of the Constitution, the President's veto 
authority has been interpreted to mean that he must sign or veto an 
entire piece of legislation.
  The Constitution reads: ``Every Bill which shall have passed the 
House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a 
Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve 
he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to 
that House in which it shall have originated, *  *  *'' this section 
then proceeds to outline the procedures by which Congress may override 
this veto with a two-thirds vote of both houses.
  The amendment that I am introducing today amends this language as it 
pertains to appropriations bills. It specifically provides that the 
President shall have the power to disapprove any appropriation of an 
appropriations bill at the time the President approves the bill.
  This change will make explicit that the President is no longer 
confined to either vetoing or signing an entire bill,

[[Page 19987]]

but that he may choose to single out certain appropriations for veto 
and still sign a portion of the bill.
  A constitutional amendment ensuring that the President has line-item 
veto authority over congressional spending bills is an important tool 
in our continuing efforts to restore fiscal responsibility to the 
Federal government.
  Mr. President, I look forward to further discussion on this important 
issue. We must seriously consider a constitutional amendment to allow 
the line item veto, and I hope that my colleagues will support this 
amendment or similar language in the Senate.

                          ____________________