[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1089-1111]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 2051. A bill to revise the boundaries of the Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.


  the golden gate national recreation area boundary adjustment act of 
                                  2000

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce this 
legislation to permit the National Park Service to expand the 
boundaries of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) by 
acquiring critical natural landscapes and scenic vistas. This includes 
land in San Mateo County, as well as land in San Francisco and Marin 
County.
  A key component of this legislation is that about half of the total 
cost of purchasing these lands will be donated by the local community. 
This legislation specifically provides that all land transactions 
involve a willing seller and willing buyer.
  In introducing this bill, I am joined by my esteemed colleague from 
California, Senator Barbara Boxer. This bill also has the bipartisan 
support of the entire Bay Area Congressional Delegation including 
original co-sponsors in the House, Representatives Tom Lantos, Nancy 
Pelosi, and Lynn Woolsey.
  Furthermore, this bill also has the strong support of local 
environmental and advocacy and preservation groups, the Point Reyes 
National Seashore Advisory Commission, and the National Park Service. I 
know of no opposition to this bill.
  The three Marin County properties lie in the Marin headlands. 
Preservation of these lands will protect habitat, ridge-top trails and 
scenic views of San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean.
  The San Francisco land along the pacific coastline, the city of San 
Francisco would like to donate to the federal government and has 
authorized $100,000 for the restoration of this site.
  The legislation also proposes to include land near Labos Creek, 
adjacent to the Presido-West Gate, which was damaged during a severe 
storm in 1997. The American Land Conservancy intends to acquire this 
land and donate it to the National Park Service. Lobos Creek is the key 
source of the Presidio's water supply and a unique ecological resource.
  Together, these parcels offer beautiful vistas, sweeping coastal 
views and spectacular headland scenery and the preservation of unique 
bayland ecosystems with added public access. Much of this land also 
protects the habitat of several species of rare or endangered plants 
and animals. Several of the vegetation communities is home to at least 
18 endangered or threatened species including the winter-run chinook 
salmon, American peregrine falcon, the mission blue butterfly and the 
southwestern pond turtle.
  I urge my colleagues to support passage of the Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 2052. A bill to establish a demonstration project to authorize the 
integration and coordination of Federal funding dedicated to community, 
business, and the economic development of Native American communities; 
to the Committee on Indian Affairs.


       indian tribal development consolidated funding act of 2000

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, though there are glimmers of hope in 
Native communities, most Native Americans remain racked by 
unemployment, mired in poverty, and rank at or near the bottom of 
nearly every social and economic indicator in the nation.
  For years the Committee on Indian Affairs, which I chair, has made

[[Page 1090]]

strengthening Indian economies a top priority. Healthy tribal economies 
and lower unemployment rates are imperative if tribes are to achieve 
the goals of self-sufficiency and true self-determination.
  Although federal economic development assistance has been available 
for years, poverty, ill health, and unemployment remain rampant.
  One of the reasons for the lack of success despite spending billions 
of dollars, is the lack of a consistent or consolidated federal policy 
to target development resources. Indian business, economic and 
community development programs span the entire federal government and 
for any given project undertaken by a tribe, there may be 6 to 8 or 
more agencies involved. This fragmentation and lack of coordination is 
not producing the kind of progress Indian country so badly needs.
  To begin to remedy this problem, today I am pleased to introduce 
legislation that builds on the most successful federal Indian policy to 
date: Indian self-determination.
  The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, which was 
enacted in 1975, authorizes Indian tribes and tribal consortia to 
``step into the shoes'' of the federal government to administer 
programs and services historically provided by the United States.
  This Act has worked as it was intended and has resulted in improved 
efficiency of program delivery and service quality; better managed 
tribal institutions; stronger tribal economies; and a general shift 
away from federal control over Indian lives to more local, tribal 
authority.
  What began as a Demonstration Project in 1975 has blossomed as more 
and more tribal governments realize the benefits of self governance.
  As of 1999, nearly 48 percent of all Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) 
and 50 percent of all Indian Health Service (IHS) programs and services 
have been assumed by tribes under the Indian Self-Determination Act.
  The legislation I introduce today will begin the second phase of the 
Self-Determination experiment by assistant Indian tribes in their use 
and maximization of existing federal resources for purposes of economic 
development.
  By authorizing tribes and tribal consortia to consolidate and target 
existing federal funds for development purposes, this bill will promote 
a more efficient use of federal resources. Perhaps more importantly, 
the legislation will lay the foundation for a development strategy that 
looks to employment creation, investment and improved standards of 
living in Indian country as the real measure of a successful 
development policy.
  One of the key goals of this bill is to eliminate inconsistencies and 
duplication in federal policies that continue to be a barrier to Indian 
development through the issuance of uniform regulations and policies 
governing the use of funds across federal agencies.
  By authorizing federal-tribal arrangements to combine and coordinate 
federal resources, this bill will make the best use of existing federal 
programs to assist tribes in attracting private investment and capital 
onto Indian reservations.
  Already in this session we have addressed other building blocks to 
Indian development such as financing housing construction and physical 
infrastructure, the need for good governance practices at the federal 
and tribal levels, ensuring adequate capital for entrepreneurs, and 
encouraging private sector investment into Native communities.
  I am hopeful that the legislation I introduce today will signal a new 
day for how the federal government assists Native communities in 
creating jobs and building a better future for their members.
  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. 2052

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

     SECTION 1. TITLE.

       The Act may be cited as the ``Indian Tribal Development 
     Consolidated Funding Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) A unique legal and political relationship exists 
     between the United States and Indian tribes that is reflected 
     in article I, clause 3 of the Constitution of the United 
     States, various treaties, Federal statutes, Supreme Court 
     decisions, executive agreements, and course of dealing.
       (2) Despite the infusion of substantial Federal dollars 
     into Native American communities over several decades, the 
     majority of Native Americans remain mired in poverty, 
     unemployment, and despair.
       (3) The efforts of the United States to foster community, 
     economic, and business development in Native American 
     communities have been hampered by fragmentation of authority, 
     responsibility and performance and by lack of timeliness and 
     coordination in resources and decision-making.
       (4) The effectiveness of Federal and tribal efforts to 
     generate employment opportunities and bring value-added 
     activities and economic growth to Native American communities 
     depends on cooperative arrangements among the various Federal 
     agencies and Indian tribes.
       (b) Purposes.--It is the purpose of this Act to--
       (1) enable Indian tribes and tribal organizations to use 
     available Federal assistance more effectively and 
     efficiently;
       (2) adapt and target such assistance more readily to 
     particular needs through wider use of projects that are 
     supported by more than 1 executive agency, assistance 
     program, or appropriation of the Federal Government;
       (3) encourage Federal-tribal arrangements under which 
     Indian tribes and tribal organizations may more effectively 
     and efficiently combine Federal and tribal resources to 
     support economic development projects;
       (4) promote the coordination of Native American economic 
     programs to maximize the benefits of these programs to 
     encourage a more consolidated, national policy for economic 
     development; and
       (5) establish a demonstration project to aid Indian tribes 
     in obtaining Federal resources and in more efficiently 
     administering these resources for the furtherance of tribal 
     self-governance and self-determination.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Applicant.--The term ``applicant'' means an Indian 
     tribe or tribal organization applying for assistance for a 
     community, economic, or business development project, 
     including facilities to improve the environment, housing, 
     roads, community facilities, business and industrial 
     facilities, transportation, roads and highway, and community 
     facilities.
       (2) Assistance.--The term ``assistance'' means the transfer 
     of anything of value for a public purpose or support or 
     stimulation that is--
       (A) authorized by a law of the United States; and
       (B) provided by the Federal Government through grant or 
     contractual arrangements, including technical assistance 
     programs providing assistance by loan, loan guarantee, or 
     insurance.
       (3) Assistance program.--The term ``assistance program'' 
     means any program of the Federal Government that provides 
     assistance for which Indian tribes or tribal organizations 
     are eligible.
       (4) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450b(e)).
       (5) Project.--The term ``project'' means an undertaking 
     that includes components that contribute materially to 
     carrying out 1 purpose or closely-related purposes that are 
     proposed or approved for assistance under more than 1 Federal 
     Government program.
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (7) Tribal organization.--The term ``tribal organization'' 
     has the meaning given such term in section 4(l) of the Indian 
     Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450b(l)).

     SEC. 4. LEAD AGENCY.

       The lead agency for purposes of carrying out this Act shall 
     be the Department of the Interior.

     SEC. 5. SELECTION OF PARTICIPATING TRIBES.

       (a) Participants.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may select not to exceed 24 
     Indian tribes in each fiscal year from the applicant pool 
     described in subsection (b) to participate in the projects 
     carried out under this Act.
       (2) Consortia.--Two or more Indian tribes that are 
     otherwise eligible to participate in a program or activity to 
     which this Act applies may form a consortium to participate 
     as a single Indian tribe under paragraph (1).
       (b) Applicant Pool.--The applicant pool described in this 
     subsection shall consist of each Indian tribe that--
       (1) successfully completes the planning phase described in 
     subsection (c);
       (2) has requested participation in a project under this Act 
     through a resolution or other official action of the tribal 
     governing body; and

[[Page 1091]]

       (3) has demonstrated, for the 3 fiscal years immediately 
     preceding the fiscal year for which the requested 
     participation is being made, financial stability and 
     financial management capability as demonstrated by the Indian 
     tribe having no material audit exceptions in the required 
     annual audit of the self-determination contracts of the 
     tribe.
       (c) Planning Phase.--Each Indian tribe seeking to 
     participate in a project under this Act shall complete a 
     planning phase that shall include legal and budgetary 
     research and internal tribal government and organizational 
     preparation. The tribe shall be eligible for a grant under 
     this section to plan and negotiate participation in a project 
     under this Act.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORITY OF HEADS OF EXECUTIVE AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--The President, acting through the heads of 
     the appropriate executive agencies, shall promulgate 
     regulations necessary to carry out this Act and to ensure 
     that this Act is applied and implemented by all executive 
     agencies.
       (b) Scope of Coverage.--The executive agencies that are 
     included within the scope of this Act shall include--
       (1) the Department of Agriculture;
       (2) the Department of Commerce;
       (3) the Department of Defense;
       (4) the Department of Education;
       (5) the Department of Health and Human Services;
       (6) the Department of Housing and Urban Development;
       (7) the Department of the Interior;
       (8) the Department of Labor; and
       (9) the Environmental Protection Agency.
       (c) Activities.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the head of each executive agency, acting alone or 
     jointly through an agreement with another executive agency, 
     may--
       (1) identify related Federal programs that are likely to be 
     particularly suitable in providing for the joint financing of 
     specific kinds of projects;
       (2) assist in planning and developing projects to be 
     financed through different Federal programs;
       (3) with respect to Federal programs or projects that are 
     identified or developed under paragraphs (1) or (2), develop 
     and prescribe--
       (A) guidelines;
       (B) model or illustrative projects;
       (C) joint or common application forms; and
       (D) other materials or guidance;
       (4) review administrative program requirements to identify 
     those requirements that may impede the joint financing of 
     projects and modify such requirement when appropriate;
       (5) establish common technical and administrative 
     regulations for related Federal programs to assist in 
     providing joint financing to support a specific project or 
     class of projects; and
       (6) establish joint or common application processing and 
     project supervision procedures, including procedures for 
     designating--
       (A) a lead agency responsible for processing applications; 
     and
       (B) a managing agency responsible for project supervision.
       (d) Requirements.--In carrying out this Act, the head of 
     each executive agency shall--
       (1) take all appropriate actions to carry out this Act when 
     administering a Federal assistance program; and
       (2) consult and cooperate with the heads of other executive 
     agencies to carry out this Act in assisting in the 
     administration of Federal assistance programs of other 
     executive agencies that may be used to jointly finance 
     projects undertaken by Indian tribes or tribal organizations.

     SEC. 7. PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING REQUESTS FOR JOINT 
                   FINANCING.

       In processing an application or request for assistance for 
     a project to be financed in accordance with this Act by at 
     least 2 assistance programs, the head of an executive agency 
     shall take all appropriate actions to ensure that--
       (1) required reviews and approvals are handled 
     expeditiously;
       (2) complete account is taken of special considerations of 
     timing that are made known to the head of the agency involved 
     by the applicant that would affect the feasibility of a 
     jointly financed project;
       (3) an applicant is required to deal with a minimum number 
     of representatives of the Federal Government;
       (4) an applicant is promptly informed of a decision or 
     special problem that could affect the feasibility of 
     providing joint assistance under the application; and
       (5) an applicant is not required to get information or 
     assurances from 1 executive agency for a requesting executive 
     agency when the requesting agency makes the information or 
     assurances directly.

     SEC. 8. UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES.

       (a) In General.--To make participation in a project simpler 
     than would otherwise be possible because of the application 
     of varying or conflicting technical or administrative 
     regulations or procedures that are not specifically required 
     by the statute that authorizes the Federal program under 
     which such project is funded, the head of an executive agency 
     may promulgate uniform regulations concerning inconsistent or 
     conflicting requirements with respect to--
       (1) the financial administration of the project including 
     accounting, reporting and auditing, and maintaining a 
     separate bank account, to the extent consistent with this 
     Act;
       (2) the timing of payments by the Federal Government for 
     the project when 1 payment schedule or a combined payment 
     schedule is to be established for the project;
       (3) the provision of assistance by grant rather than 
     procurement contract; and
       (4) the accountability for, or the disposition of, records, 
     property, or structures acquired or constructed with 
     assistance from the Federal Government under the project.
       (b) Review.--In making the processing of applications for 
     assistance under a project simpler under this Act, the head 
     of an executive agency may provide for review of proposals 
     for a project by a single panel, board, or committee where 
     reviews by separate panels, boards, or committees are not 
     specifically required by the statute that authorizes the 
     Federal program under which such project is funded.

     SEC. 9. DELEGATION OF SUPERVISION OF ASSISTANCE.

       Pursuant to regulations established to implement this Act, 
     the head of an executive agency may delegate or otherwise 
     enter into an arrangement to have another executive agency 
     carry out or supervise a project or class or projects jointly 
     financed in accordance with this Act. Such a delegation--
       (1) shall be made under conditions ensuring that the duties 
     and powers delegated are exercised consistent with Federal 
     law; and
       (2) may not be made in a manner that relieves the head of 
     an executive agency of responsibility for the proper and 
     efficient management of a project for which the agency 
     provides assistance.

     SEC. 10. JOINT ASSISTANCE FUNDS AND PROJECT FACILITATION.

       (a) Joint Assistance Fund.--In providing support for a 
     project in accordance with this Act, the head of an executive 
     agency may provide for the establishment by the applicant of 
     a joint assistance fund to ensure that amounts received from 
     more than 1 Federal assistance program or appropriation are 
     more effectively administered.
       (b) Agreement.--A joint assistance fund may only be 
     established under subsection (a) in accordance with an 
     agreement by the executive agencies involved concerning the 
     responsibilities of each such agency. Such an agreement 
     shall--
       (1) ensure the availability of necessary information to the 
     executive agencies and Congress;
       (2) provide that the agency administering the fund is 
     responsible and accountable by program and appropriation for 
     the amounts provided for the purposes of each account in the 
     fund; and
       (3) include procedures for returning an excess amount in 
     the fund to participating executive agencies under the 
     applicable appropriation (an excess amount of an expired 
     appropriation lapses from the fund).

     SEC. 11. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, ACCOUNTABILITY AND AUDITS.

       (a) Single Audit Act.--Recipients of funding provided in 
     accordance with this Act shall be subject to the provisions 
     of chapter 75 of title 31, United States Code.
       (b) Records.--With respect to each project financed through 
     an account in a joint management fund established under 
     section 10, the recipient of amounts from the fund shall 
     maintain records as required by the head of the executive 
     agencies responsible for administering the fund. Such records 
     shall include--
       (1) the amount and disposition by the recipient of 
     assistance received under each Federal assistance program and 
     appropriation;
       (2) the total cost of the project for which such assistance 
     was given or used;
       (3) that part of the cost of the project provided from 
     other sources; and
       (4) other records that will make it easier to conduct an 
     audit of the project.
       (c) Availability.--Records of a recipient related to an 
     amount received from a joint management fund under this Act 
     shall be made available to the head of the executive agency 
     responsible for administering the fund and the Comptroller 
     General for inspection and audit.

     SEC. 12. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND PERSONNEL TRAINING.

       Amounts available for technical assistance and personnel 
     training under any Federal assistance program shall be 
     available for technical assistance and training under a 
     project approved for joint financing under this Act where a 
     portion of such financing involves such Federal assistance 
     program and another assistance program.

     SEC. 13. JOINT FINANCING FOR FEDERAL-TRIBAL ASSISTED 
                   PROJECTS.

       Under regulations promulgated under this Act, the head of 
     an executive agency may enter into an agreement with a State 
     to extend the benefits of this Act to a project that involves 
     assistance from at least 1 executive agency and at least 1 
     tribal agency or instrumentality. The agreement may include 
     arrangements to process requests or administer assistance on 
     a joint basis.

[[Page 1092]]



     SEC. 14. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the President shall prepare and submit to Congress a 
     report concerning the actions taken under this Act together 
     with recommendations for the continuation of this Act or 
     proposed amendments thereto. Such report shall include a 
     detailed evaluation of the operation of this Act, including 
     information on the benefits and costs of jointly financed 
     projects that accrue to participating Indian tribes and 
     tribal organizations.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JEFFORDS:
  S. 2053. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
marriage tax penalty relief for earned income credit; to the Committee 
on Finance.


                      MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY RELIEF

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to reduce 
the marriage penalty built into the Earned Income Tax Credit--the EITC. 
It appears that Congress may well act to address the marriage penalty 
this year. Eliminating the marriage penalty is a worthwhile goal. A 
marriage license shouldn't come with a higher tax bill from Uncle Sam. 
As we consider this issue, however, I want to make sure that low-income 
taxpayers are not left out of the debate. In terms of dollars, the EITC 
marriage penalty may be relatively small, but for workers trying to 
raise children on low wages it represents a significant loss of income, 
and it may well deter couples from marrying.
  Though our nation's economy continues to thrive, many Americans still 
struggle to make ends meet. Working families across the nation hover 
above the poverty level, striving to stay off welfare and yearning to 
provide a decent life for their children. We can and must do more to 
help these families. And we can do it through the tax code in a manner 
that is proven and fair, using the earned income tax credit. The EITC 
is a refundable tax credit specifically targeted to help low-income 
workers and their families. In my state of Vermont, with soaring 
housing costs and spiking fuel costs, the EITC has proven effective in 
supplementing the income of working families.
  By some estimates, the EITC has moved more than two million children 
out of poverty. One recent report calls it the most effective safety 
net program for children in working poor families. In 1999, the EITC 
provided low-income working families with two children a subsidy of 
roughly 40 cents for every dollar of income. But after income reaches a 
certain point, the EITC is gradually phased out.
  Unfortunately, a marriage penalty is built into the EITC. This 
marriage penalty exists because a married couple's combined earnings 
put them at a higher point in the EITC phase-out range than where one 
or both of them would have been if they had remained single. If, for 
example, one minimum wage earner marries another minimum wage earner 
with two children, the couple's EITC would be over $1,300 less than the 
combined EITC they would have received if they hadn't gotten married. 
For working families that subsist on the minimum wage, this is a 
significant loss--more than half of their combined wages for a month.
  To reduce the EITC marriage penalty, the bill I'm introducing will 
extend the point at which the EITC begins to phase out. This is the 
approach I advocated, and which was subsequently adopted in last year's 
tax bill. It is also the approach adopted in the bill passed by the 
Ways and Means Committee. The difference between my bill and these 
other bills is the amount by which the beginning point of the phase-out 
range would be extended. The other bills proposed to extend it by 
$2,000. I propose to extend it by $3,500; this would provide 
significantly more marriage penalty relief. My back-of-the-envelope 
calculations indicate that my bill would eliminate about half of the 
marriage penalties built into the EITC.
  I do not have a cost estimate for this bill. For the Ways and Means 
marriage penalty bill, the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that a 
$2,000 extension of the beginning point of the EITC phase-out would 
cost $11 billion over 10 years. This is a relatively small part of a 
bill whose overall 10-year cost is $182 billion.
  Last year, the conferees on the tax bill initially chose not to 
include help for EITC taxpayers in the marriage penalty provisions. I 
threatened to vote against the bill, probably depriving it of a 
majority in the Senate. The conference was reopened, and relief of the 
EITC marriage penalty was included in the final bill. I think that 
shows how strongly I feel about this issue. I'm glad that the House has 
looked out for low-income taxpayers in its marriage penalty bill. 
Still, I think we can do better.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WELLSTONE:
  S. 2055. A bill to establish the Katie Poirier Abduction Emergency 
Fund, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                              KATIE'S LAW

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a piece of 
legislation that I hope will be called Katie's Law. This past year, 
colleagues, in Carlton County, we lost a young, beautiful woman who 
worked at a convenience store. She was abducted. Everybody in the 
community helped the family. Tragically, later her body was recovered. 
A suspect has been arrested for her murder.
  I have, along with Sheila, stayed in close touch with Katie's family. 
We have talked quite often with her mother Pam, her dad Steve, and her 
brother Patrick.
  When I went to the service, I couldn't even stand it, just to see the 
pain. This never should have happened.
  I thought about what I could do as a Senator to make a difference. I, 
therefore, started talking to a lot of our rural law enforcement 
people. They told me that whatever we could do in Congress, the key 
would be to enhance their ability to respond quickly and aggressively 
to such crimes, that that would make a difference.
  So there are two pieces to this piece of legislation. I hope I will 
get tremendous bipartisan support.
  The first is an abduction emergency fund called the Katie Poirier 
Abduction Emergency Fund. Basically, what I am saying, colleagues, is 
that for rural law enforcement, especially in the critical first 72 
hours, they should never have to worry about whether they will have the 
resources and what the cost will be. This will be an emergency fund 
they can draw upon from the Attorney General, to State agencies, down 
to the local level. For our rural law enforcement community, this is 
critically important.
  Then the second piece is to provide local law enforcement officers 
with resources to use the latest identification systems to solve and 
prevent crime. In our metropolitan areas we have the technology, but in 
our rural communities quite often our local law enforcement communities 
do not have the capacity to link up with systems such as the FBI's very 
sophisticated fingerprint identification system. This can be the 
difference between 2 hours and 2 months. There will be money that will 
go to local law enforcement, rural law enforcement so they can be able 
to take advantage of this technology.
  Altogether, with the abduction emergency fund, we are talking about 
$10 million over 3 years, for $30 million; and on the technology 
upgrade for rural law enforcement, we are talking about $20 million 
over 3 years, for $60 million--total cost for 3 years, $90 million.
  This is incredibly important to rural America. It is an investment we 
should make. While I know no piece of legislation can ever provide 100 
percent safety for our children, I do know this piece of legislation 
will make a difference for rural law enforcement and will provide some 
protection for our children and will provide some protection for our 
rural citizens.
  I have never been more determined to pass any piece of legislation 
than this small step. It is something I think I should do as a Senator. 
I think as Senators talk to their rural communities from around the 
country, they will find this does meet a very critical need.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JOHNSON (for himself and Mr. Craig):
  S. 2056. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act

[[Page 1093]]

to ensure an adequate level of commodity purchases under the school 
lunch program; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and 
Forestry.


                  EMERGENCY COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION ACT

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague Senator 
Johnson in introducing the Emergency Commodity Distribution Act of 
2000.
  Children are our future. I strongly believe each child deserves at 
least one warm, nutritious meal every day. I stand before you today 
with a new bill that will restore $500 million to the School Lunch 
Program. The positive impacts of this program are endless. Children 
should not have to pay the price of not having enough money for food.
  Originally enacted in 1946, the school lunch program set goals to 
improve children's nutrition, increase low-income children's access to 
nutritious meals, and to help support the agricultural industry. A 
family of four has to have an income at or below 130 percent of the 
federal poverty level to qualify for a free lunch. The income for these 
families is tragically low. Congress has a role in providing these 
children with assistance their families cannot provide.
  Last year, Congress enacted the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives 
Improvement Act. This legislation amended the School Lunch Act to 
require the United States Department of Agriculture to count the value 
of bonus commodities when it determines the total amount of commodity 
assistance provided to schools. This change will result in a $500 
million budget cut for the school lunch program over a nine-year 
period.
  In FY1998, the school lunch program comprised over 90 percent of 
schools, with some 90,000 schools enrolling 46.5 million children. 
Children receiving free lunches averaged 13 million a day, and those 
receiving reduced price lunches averaged 2.2 million a day. Each state 
and millions of children are affected. This program provides a basic 
requirement of food for needy children.
  No child should be without food. The Emergency Commodity Distribution 
Act of 2000 would ensure that schools receive the full value of 
entitlement commodity assistance, and allow the School Lunch Program to 
continue to meet its dual purpose of supporting American agriculture 
while providing nutritious food to schools across the country. I urge 
members to support this bill, support children, and support our future.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MURKOWSKI:
  S. 2057. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit 
the use of electronic measurement units (EMUs); to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


                   the motorists privacy act of 2000

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Motorists 
Privacy Act of 2000. This legislation has become necessary because 
technological advancements threaten to allow government and private 
enterprise to develop a vast database of information about the comings 
and goings of ordinary Americans.
  Recently, I learned of a device known as an electronic measurement 
unit (EMU). EMUs are placed on billboards along highways and at the 
entrances to stadiums and concert locations in Atlanta, Indianapolis, 
Los Angeles, Phoenix, Boston, and a variety of other cities throughout 
the nation. These shoe-box size devices instantly determine what radio 
station a car radio is tuned to by detecting electronic signals emitted 
from the oscillators in every car radio.
  These devices are capable of measuring tens of thousands of radios in 
passing cars every day. And they provide nearly instantaneous 
information on the number of people listening to a radio station at any 
given time. This valuable data can then be sold to radio owners, who 
can then adjust their advertising rates based on listenership.
  Mr. President, there is nothing wrong with surveying radio usage so 
long as a citizen voluntarily chooses to participate in such a survey. 
However, when private enterprise or the government begin to monitor 
radio or television usage, without the knowledge of the citizen, then a 
line is crossed that can only lead down the path to Big Brother. And as 
far as this Senator is concerned, that is not going to happen so long 
as I am a Member of the Senate.
  When a citizen is sitting inside of his or her car, there is a 100 
percent expectation of privacy that what is said and listened to is 
private. Motorists, rightfully, should have no suspicion that they are 
being monitored by the government or by private enterprise. However, in 
the case of EMUs, few motorists are aware that these devices even exist 
and in most cases, no attempt is made to inform motorists when they 
enter an area in which EMUs are utilized.
  Mr. President, what right does a company or government have to snoop 
on what people are listening to in their automobiles? It is not a very 
great leap to imagine a world where EMUs track not only what you listen 
to in the car, but combined with remote television cameras, track your 
driving patterns. And surely, such devices could be installed in 
neighborhoods in order to monitor what families watch on television in 
their homes. Surely such invasions of privacy cannot be tolerated.
  Therefore, I am today introducing the Motorists Privacy Act which 
outlaws the use of electronic measurement units to scan car radios. 
Regardless of whether or not these scans are anonymous, motorists 
deserve the same expectation of privacy within their cars as does a 
homeowner. 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. 2057

       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 ``Motorists Privacy Act of 
     2000''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF ELECTRONIC MEASUREMENT UNITS.

       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 new section:

     ``SEC. 338. PROHIBITION ON USE OF ELECTRONIC MEASUREMENT 
                   UNITS.

       ``(a) Prohibition.--No person may install, post, operate, 
     or otherwise use an electronic measurement unit (EMU).
       ``(b) Electronic Measurement Unit Defined.--In subsection 
     (a), the term `electronic measurement unit (EMU)' means a 
     device that determines the frequency of the radio broadcast 
     being received by a radio receiver located within a vehicle 
     passing through the operating range of the device.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Mack, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Durbin, 
        and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2058. A bill to extend filing deadlines for applications for 
adjustment of status of certain Cuban, Nicaraguan, and Haitian 
nationals; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


legislation to extend filing deadlines for applications for adjustment 
     of status of certain Cuban, Nicaraguan, and Haitian nationals

  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I come to the Senate floor this afternoon 
to introduce legislation which has as its objective to assure a greater 
measure of fairness to a particularly vulnerable group of Central 
American and Caribbean nationals who, in many cases, for many years 
have resided in the United States.
  I appreciate the support of my colleagues: Senators Mack, Kennedy, 
Durbin, and Feinstein, who join in this effort as cosponsors.
  For some background: In 1997, and again in 1998, Congress passed 
legislation to protect, first, a group of Central American and Cuban 
nationals and then a similar group of Haitian nationals who were 
refugees and were threatened with deportation.
  Action was needed in those 2 years because of passage of the 1996 
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which 
changed immigration rules and did so, in many instances, retroactively. 
The history of this group of people started during the Presidency of 
Ronald Reagan. The United States offered protection and legal status to 
many Central American nationals who were fighting for democracy in 
their home country or fleeing the war that had ensued. Similarly, 
during the Presidency of George Bush,

[[Page 1094]]

Haitian nationals were forced to flee after the overthrow of the 
elected President, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, in 1994. They were offered 
protection and legal status in the United States.
  In 1996, these Central American and Haitian nationals had been living 
in our country for years; in the cases of the Central Americans, often 
longer than a decade. They established businesses. They formed and 
raised families. They bought homes. They strengthened the communities 
in which they lived. Then in 1996, with the passage of the Illegal 
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, these Central 
American and Haitian individuals and families were made retroactively 
deportable. These deportations would have occurred years and years 
after these nationals had established their lives in the United States.
  Congress moved quickly to protect their legal status here by passing 
the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act in November 
of 1997, and then the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act in 
October of 1998. These two bills made certain sections of the 1996 
immigration law nonretroactive. We mandated in those two pieces of 
legislation that to apply for relief from deportation under this 
measure, applications had to be made by a date certain: March 31, 2000.
  The sad fact is, in 3 years after one of these pieces of legislation 
was passed and more than 2 years after another, we are still waiting 
for the final regulations to be issued for both of these pieces of 
legislation. The final rules that would help families apply for relief 
have not yet been issued. Interim regulations were issued for both 
bills in 1998 and 1999, but in neither case have the regulations become 
final. There is the very real possibility that the application 
deadline, March 31, 2000, could come and go before the final 
regulations, which establish the rules and procedures by which 
applications will be submitted and evaluated, have even been issued.
  Both for reasons of fairness and to promote good Government, we 
should extend the application deadline for relief. Under this 
legislation, the new deadline for relief will be 1 year after the date 
the regulations become final.
  I point out to my colleagues that this legislation will not cover any 
additional individuals who will have the right to apply for the right 
to live in the United States. No additional persons will be granted 
eligibility as a result of this legislation beyond those who were made 
eligible in 1997 and again in 1998. What this legislation does is 
create a more realistic and fair deadline for individuals Congress has 
already passed legislation to protect.
  This action should be taken because it is fair. First, it is fair to 
the immigrants. We shouldn't expect them to go through the arduous and 
very costly application process without the certainty that the 
regulations which will govern their applications are final.
  It is easy to put a human face on this issue. There are scores, 
hundreds, thousands of examples. Let me just cite one which was brought 
to my attention by a prominent immigration attorney in Florida. I will 
call this young woman, in order to protect her privacy, Frances. She is 
a real human being. Frances is 22 years old. Her parents fled Haiti in 
the 1980s, when she was a child. Her family settled in Florida. She now 
has three U.S. citizen brothers and sisters. Tragedy has struck her 
family on several occasions. Her father died when she was just 7 years 
old. Her mother died when she was still in her early teens. She 
finished high school and is now raising her younger brothers and 
sisters while working. She is an orphan. She would be in the class of 
persons protected by the 1998 legislation. She is trying now to put 
together the documents necessary to apply to stay in the United States 
and not be separated from her U.S. citizen brothers and sisters, the 
only family she has left.
  The 1-year extension and the ability to apply for relief once 
regulations are final will make a huge difference in the life of this 
woman, will make a huge difference in her ability to comply with 
procedures which are probably the most significant in her life.
  Today, I am introducing this in an effort to secure as rapid a 
resolution of these concerns as possible. I am not unmindful of the 
magnitude of the task Congress has asked the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service to perform. I don't want to imply that the INS 
and other Federal agencies should rush through these technical pieces 
of legislation. However, in situations such as this, where a longer 
time than expected was needed to develop the regulations, it is only 
fair to allow a longer time for those who are going to be affected by 
the law.
  I understand the INS has been very thorough and understanding. It has 
met with individual groups on all sides of this issue. Many of them 
have been my constituents in Florida. I commend the INS for its 
willingness to hear all points of view and be thorough in their review 
before issuing final regulations. However, having said that, I believe 
nearly 3 years is a reasonable amount of time to have finalized these 
regulations.
  The Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act took only 
nine pages of text in Public Law 105-100 when it was passed. Similarly, 
the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act took less than two pages 
to print in the Congressional Record. These were concise, targeted 
pieces of legislation. They were not lengthy, complex overhauls of 
major components of the immigration law. It is plain unfair to give 
someone a deadline and charge them a substantial fee to file and then 
to be uncertain as to what the rules will be that will govern those 
applications. With this legislation, I seek the flexibility to allow 
more time to apply for relief in a situation where more time than 
expected was necessary by the agency, the INS, to issue the 
regulations.
  I send to the desk a few of the letters I have received from 
individuals and advocacy groups and religious leaders calling for this 
deadline extension, and I ask unanimous consent that these letters from 
the American Immigration Lawyers Association of South Florida, the 
Haitian American Foundation, the Haiti Advocacy Agency, all be printed 
in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See Exhibit 1.)
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I send the legislation to the desk, which 
has been cosponsored by Senators Mack, Kennedy, Durbin, and Feinstein. 
I ask my colleagues for their understanding and their support for this 
legislation--legislation that will ensure the most basic elements of 
fairness in our democratic system, which will allow people who have 
fled war and persecution to come to the freedom of the United States 
and to be treated fairly by our laws.

                             Exhibit No. 1

                                              American Immigration


                                          Lawyers Association,

                                        South Florida Chapter,

                                                 January 24, 2000.
     Senator Bob Graham,
     U.S. Senate,
     Re: Letter of support for your effort to extend application 
         period for HRIFA & NACARA.
       Dear Senator Graham: On behalf of the South Florida Chapter 
     of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) I 
     write this letter of support to encourage you in your effort 
     to introduce legislation to extend the application period for 
     HRIFA & NACARA beneficiaries.
       My organization has long-supported both bills and is 
     appreciative of your great efforts in support of these 
     efforts. Please let us know if there is anything we can do to 
     help.
       Thank you, Senator Graham.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Michael D. Ray,
     President, AILA South Florida Chapter.
                                  ____



                            Haitian American Foundation, Inc.,

                                                 January 24, 2000.
     Hon. Bob Graham,
     U.S. Senate, Senate Office Bldg.
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Sir: Thank you for introducing legislation to extend 
     the filing period under which HRIFA and NACARA can be filed.
       Haitians have had an extraordinarily short period of time 
     to apply--a mere nine months. Due to this narrow time period, 
     many eligible poor people have not been able to apply because 
     of the uncapped INS fee structure

[[Page 1095]]

     and the reluctance of the few pro bono attorneys serving them 
     to submit fee waiver requests for fear that INS might deem 
     the application untimely. As you know, as of December 31, 
     1999 only 18,000 individuals had applied (of 50,000 INS 
     estimates are eligible).
       This low number of applicants is due to the high costs 
     involved. Most families must pay between $1,000 to $2,000 in 
     INS fees alone. Supplement fees--such as the requisite 
     medical exams--are additional financial burdens for 
     applicants.
       Extension of the HRIFA and NACARA filing deadline is 
     essential if Congress hopes to help Haitian refugees. Some 
     30,000 Haitians in South Florida are expected to benefit from 
     such extension.
       Your legislation is indispensable and crucial. I applaud 
     your leadership in introducing the legislation and thereby 
     serving as a champion to your constituents.
           Sincerely,
                                              Leonie M. Hermantin,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

                                             Haiti Advocacy, Inc.,


                                   1309 Independence Avenue SE

                                 Washington, DC, January 31, 2000.
     Office of the Hon. Bob Graham,
     524 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Re: Extension of HRIFA/NACARA Filing Deadlines.
       Dear Senator Graham: We are greatly encouraged that you are 
     introducing legislation to extend the deadlines for 
     applications under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central 
     American Relief Act (NACARA) and the Haitian Refugee 
     Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA).
       As you know, more than 2 years has passed since the passage 
     of NACARA and more than one since the passage of HRIFA and 
     the INS has yet to issue final regulations implementing these 
     laws. The statutory deadline for applications under both 
     laws, April 1, 2000, is fast approaching.
       Interim regulations contained unreasonably burdensome 
     documentary requirements, excessive fees and lack of 
     appropriate consideration for special groups such as 
     abandoned children and refugees who were compelled to use 
     false documents in order to flee. These and other 
     deficiencies have, to date, prevented all but a minority of 
     those eligible from filing applications.
       Hundreds of comments were filed critiquing these and other 
     restrictions as inconsistent with the remedial intent of 
     Congress. We certainly hope that the INS will give full and 
     fair consideration to these comments and ameliorate the 
     shortcomings in the final version. Nevertheless, it is now 
     apparent that any such improvements will be largely, if not 
     completely, negated by the short time remaining before the 
     deadline.
       Accordingly, it is fitting and proper to extend the 
     deadlines to one year following the promulgation of such 
     final regulations so that the intended beneficiaries of this 
     important legislation receive the full measure of justice 
     provided under law.
       Thank you for your support and kind consideration of our 
     views.
           Respectfully,
         Merrill Smith, Director; And: Linda Wood Ballard; Maurice 
           Belanger, Senior Policy Associate; National Immigration 
           Forum; 220 I Street NE, Suite 220; Washington DC 20002; 
           Phillip J. Brutus, Esq.; 645 NE 127 Street; North Miami 
           FL 33161; Alison Laird Craig, Member Haitian Studies 
           Association; Ralston H. Deffenbaugh, Jr., President; 
           Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service; Geary 
           Farrell; 0-261 Luce SW; Grand Rapids, MI 49544; Michael 
           A. Foulkes, Attorney At-Law; 4770 Biscayne Boulevard, 
           Suite 570; Miami FL 33137; Muriel Heiberger, Executive 
           Director Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy; 
           Trevor Jackson, Senior Programmer Analyst; Connecticut 
           Community Colleges--Board of Trustees; Maureen T. 
           Kelleher, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center; Guy H. 
           Larreur, President, Konbit, L.L.C.; Haitian Immigration 
           Support & Advocate Center; P.O. Box 6736; St. Thomas, 
           VI 00804; John B. Percy; 35 Parsons Road; Enfield CT 
           06082; Edwige Romulus, Chair; Haitian-American Support 
           Group of Central Florida; William Sage, Interim 
           Director; Church World Service Immigration and Refugee 
           Program; Daniel M. Schweissing; The Center for Haitian 
           Ministries; William Shagan, Supervising Attorney; 
           Lutheran Family and Community Services, Inc.; Althea 
           Stahl, Assistant Professor; Earlham College, Languages 
           and Literatures; Rick Swartz, President, Swartz & 
           Associates; Michele Wucker, Author. Why the Cocks 
           Fight: Dominicans, Haitians, and the Struggle for 
           Hispaniola; 245 West 107th Street, Apt. 9D; New York 
           NYC 10025

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SARBANES:
  S. 2059. A bill to modify land conveyance authority relating to the 
former Naval Training Center, Bainbridge, Cecil County, Maryland, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.


            bainbridge naval training center land conveyance

  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that 
would alleviate the $500,000 cost associated with the transfer of the 
former Bainbridge Naval Training Center in Cecil County, Maryland. It 
is my hope that this bill will help expedite the development of this 
property by the Bainbridge Development Corporation and the State of 
Maryland, and allow this site to realize its tremendous potential as 
soon as possible. Moreover, the money that the BDC will save through 
this waiver will be put towards salvaging several of the historic 
buildings on the site, namely, the historic Tome School.
  Next week, I will participate in the transfer ceremony for this base, 
which now represents 1200 acres of pristine and strategically located 
land. The transfer follows decades of negotiations and cleanup, and I, 
along with the Navy, my constituents in Cecil County, and the other 
members of the Maryland State congressional delegation hope to see 
development of this site begin promptly.
  In my view, the transfer of the Bainbridge site is a shining example 
of what can be accomplished through partnerships between Federal, 
State, and local governments. I introduce this bill to sustain our 
momentum and move this property into productive use as expeditiously as 
possible. Mr. President, I have spoken with the appropriate Navy 
officials regarding this matter and they have raised no concerns about 
this waiver. Indeed, this is truly a non-controversial measure with a 
very modest cost and I urge my colleagues to support its swift passage.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. 
        Baucus, and Mr. Helms):
  S. 2060. A bill to authorize the President to award a gold medal on 
behalf of the Congress to Charles M. Schulz in recognition of his 
lasting artistic contributions to the Nation and the world, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.


   legislation to award charles schultz the congressional gold medal

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, on January 3rd, 2000, Charles Schulz 
published his last daily ``Peanuts'' comic strip ending a remarkable 
fifty year run. To commemorate Charles Schulz's extraordinary career, I 
urge my colleagues to join me in awarding him a Congressional Medal of 
Honor.
  Charles Schulz's body of work in the ``Peanuts'' strip deserves 
recognition as a national treasure. For half a century, his cartoon 
illustrations have inspired millions of Americans with its wry humor 
and endearing cast of characters. Who has not been touched by the 
trials and tribulations of Charlie Brown, Snoopy, Linus, Lucy, and the 
rest of the ``Peanuts'' family?
  At its peak, Peanuts appeared in close to 3,000 newspapers in 75 
countries and was published in over 20 different languages to more than 
355 million daily readers. Charles Schulz's television special, ``A 
Charlie Brown Christmas,'' has run for 34 consecutive years. In all, 
more than 60 animated specials have been created based on ``Peanuts'' 
characters. Four feature films, 1,400 books, and a hit Broadway musical 
about the ``Peanuts'' characters also have been produced.
  Charles Schulz's achievements are all the more remarkable because, 
throughout his career, he has worked without any artistic assistants, 
unlike most syndicated cartoonists. Schulz has painstakingly drawn 
every line and frame in his comic strip for 50 years, an unparalleled 
commitment to his art and profession.
  In 1994, while speaking before the National Cartoonists Society, 
Charles Schulz said of his comic strip, ``There's still a market for 
things that are clean and decent.'' Charles Schulz has given 
generations of children a cast of colorful characters to grow up with 
and to teach the small and large lessons of life.
  Seventeen Americans from the arts and entertainment world have been 
awarded the Congressional Gold Medal for their achievements in the 
enrichment of American culture. I urge that

[[Page 1096]]

Charles Schulz become the eighteenth individual so honored. Please join 
me in recognizing the lifetime contributions of Charles Schulz by 
awarding him the Congressional Gold Medal.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Specter):
  S. 2061. A bill to establish a crime prevention and computer 
education initiative; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


                           the kids 2000 act

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, there has been incredible prosperity that 
the vast majority of our country is benefiting from--and that 
prosperity was built on a combination of communication and computers. 
This technology has opened a whole new world for America. This new 
technology has driven our economic growth. And, the future lies with 
those who can master the tools of this new economic age.
  It wasn't too long ago that it looked like our time in the sun was 
behind us. Behind us was the idea of prosperity in our country. But 
times have changed over the past few years. And we stand here today 
with the prospect of a new era of prosperity.
  With flexible financial markets, a historic wave of entrepreneurial 
activity, and the convergence of new technologies from the personal 
computer to the Internet, we are transforming ourselves into what is 
now called the ``new economy.''
  Look at the numbers: In recent years, Information Technology 
industries contributed 35% to Gross Domestic Product growth. The 
Information Technology sector is growing at twice the rate of the rest 
of the economy. And by 2006, more than half of the U.S. workforce will 
be employed by industries that are either major producers, or intensive 
users, of Information Technology.
  A lot of what we do--manufacturing, shipping, marketing, are 
basically the same old functions. But we do virtually all of them in 
new and better ways thanks to the explosion of information technology. 
This has increased our productivity in ways that the best economists 
still don't completely understand.
  But, there is one thing that we do understand: those who can master 
technology will be able to benefit from this great expansion--and that 
is why we are here today. So no one is left behind.
  That is why today I am proud to be introducing legislation, aptly 
titled Kids 2000, that will be one step in our mission to provide all 
children with access to technology.
  It is my hope, that through a public/private partnership, led by 
members of Congress and Steve and Jean Case, state-of-the-art computer 
centers will be placed in Boys & Girls Clubs nationwide. Located in 
largely under-served communities, Club computer centers will reach 
precisely the kids who need these resources the most. And none of these 
kids will be left behind.
  One goal of Kids 2000 is to help close the digital divide by 
providing kids with computers, internet access, and fully comprehensive 
technical training. As the wonders of computers become increasingly 
evident and celebrated, certain segments of society still lack access 
to these resources. Some segments are not participating in this 
technological revolution that is sweeping across our country.
  And the disparities are alarming. Look at the figures: Of households 
making over $75,000, 80% own computers and 60% use the Internet. Yet, 
for households making between $10,000-$15,000, only 16% own a computer 
and only 7% use the Internet.
  And it's not just income levels. There are disparities amongst races, 
education levels and geography. In addition, at all income levels, 
households with two parents are far more likely than one-parent 
households to own computers and have Internet access.
  The digital divide is also significant because the new digital 
economy can't run on computers alone. Businesses need workers with 
computer know-how and Internet literacy. Those who are not competent 
with the tools of technology will be left behind. Some of them are our 
kids. They are our responsibility and we cannot let this happen.
  And we know what happens to our kids when they are left behind. Their 
opportunities are vastly reduced, there is despair, and even criminal 
behavior. But there is something that we can do. And we are here today 
to begin a significant effort to do just that--to close the digital 
divide.
  Addressing the problems associated with the digital divide is not all 
this initiative seeks to do. Another goal is to reduce juvenile crime 
by providing kids with substantive after-school programs.
  Everyone has heard me say this time and time again, but let me say 
this one more time--prevention works.
  While kids are learning in these computer centers, they will be off 
the street and out of harm's way. They will be occupied with 
constructive activities. School dropout rates will be reduced because 
kids will realize that they have great potential. Kids 2000 is the 
ultimate after-school program.
  That is precisely why I have asked the Boys and Girls Clubs to host 
my computer initiative. For decades, the Boys & Girls Clubs of America 
have provided young people all across the United States with the 
support and inspiration they need to make it in a world full of peer 
pressure and crime.
  Kids 2000 also makes sense economically. It is estimated that 
allowing a single youth to drop out of high school and enter a life of 
drug abuse and crime costs society between $1.7 and $2.3 million. In 
comparison, Kids 2000 will cost the government a mere $40 per child.
  Because I believe that there is a role for the private sector, I have 
asked my good friends Jean and Steve Case and PowerUp to be an integral 
part of this initiative. That means computers, America On-Line 
accounts, educational curriculum, and fully comprehensive technical 
training in Boys and Girls Clubs nationwide.
  And PowerUp is not alone. 3-Com has committed to donating $1 million 
in networking equipment, MCI Worldcom will be donating educational 
software and training, American Airlines has agreed to donate free 
airline travel to train teachers, Ripple Effects Software will donate 
educational software, and Sabre Inc. will be donating computers.
  I want to thank all the corporations that have stepped forward and I 
hope that there will be many more in the coming months. We can't do 
this project without the private sector's help.
  I want to say thanks to Steve and Jean Case who have been in the 
forefront of this issue since the beginning and who are participating 
in this initiative in a very significant way. You know we could not do 
this without you and I appreciate your generosity and commitment to the 
cause.
  This initiative has brought together so many integral sectors of 
society. Business, government, the non-profit world. Together, we can 
make this program a success. Together we can make a difference in the 
lives of kids and provide our children with the tools they need to live 
and learn in a world that has become so dependent on technology.
  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. 2061

       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 ``Kids 2000 Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) There is an increasing epidemic of juvenile crime 
     throughout the United States.
       (2) It is well documented that the majority of juvenile 
     crimes take place during after-school hours.
       (3) Knowledge of technology is becoming increasingly 
     necessary for children in school and out of school.
       (4) The Boys and Girls Clubs of America have 2,300 clubs 
     throughout all 50 States, serving over 3,000,000 boys and 
     girls primarily from at-risk communities.
       (5) The Boys and Girls Clubs of America have the physical 
     structures in place for immediate implementation of an after-
     school technology program.

[[Page 1097]]

       (6) Building technology centers and providing integrated 
     content and full-time staffing at those centers in the Boys 
     and Girls Clubs of America nationwide will help foster 
     education, job training, and an alternative to crime for at-
     risk youth.
       (7) Partnerships between the public sector and the private 
     sector are an effective way of providing after-school 
     technology programs in the Boys and Girls Clubs of America.
       (8) PowerUp: Bridging the Digital Divide is an entity 
     comprised of more than a dozen nonprofit organizations, major 
     corporations, and Federal agencies that have joined together 
     to launch a major new initiative to help ensure that 
     America's underserved young people acquire the skills, 
     experiences, and resources they need to succeed in the 
     digital age.
       (9) Bringing PowerUp into the Boys and Girls Clubs of 
     America will be an effective way to ensure that our youth 
     have a safe, crime-free environment in which to learn the 
     technological skills they need to close the divide between 
     young people who have access to computer-based information 
     and technology-related skills and those who do not.

     SEC. 3. AFTER-SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY GRANTS TO THE BOYS AND GIRLS 
                   CLUBS OF AMERICA.

       (a) Purposes.--The Attorney General shall make grants to 
     the Boys and Girls Clubs of America for the purpose of 
     funding effective after-school technology programs, such as 
     PowerUp, in order to provide--
       (1) constructive technology-focussed activities that are 
     part of a comprehensive program to provide access to 
     technology and technology training to youth during after- 
     school hours, weekends, and school vacations;
       (2) supervised activities in safe environments for youth; 
     and
       (3) full-time staffing with teachers, tutors, and other 
     qualified personnel.
       (b) Subawards.--The Boys and Girls Clubs of America shall 
     make subawards to local boys and girls clubs authorizing 
     expenditures associated with providing technology programs 
     such as PowerUp, including the hiring of teachers and other 
     personnel, procurement of goods and services, including 
     computer equipment, or such other purposes as are approved by 
     the Attorney General.

     SEC. 4. APPLICATIONS.

       (a) Eligibility.--In order to be eligible to receive a 
     grant under this Act, an applicant for a subaward (specified 
     in section 3(b)) shall submit an application to the Boys and 
     Girls Clubs of America, in such form and containing such 
     information as the Attorney General may reasonably require.
       (b) Application Requirements.--Each application submitted 
     in accordance with subsection (a) shall include--
       (1) a request for a subgrant to be used for the purposes of 
     this Act;
       (2) a description of the communities to be served by the 
     grant, including the nature of juvenile crime, violence, and 
     drug use in the communities;
       (3) written assurances that Federal funds received under 
     this Act will be used to supplement and not supplant, non-
     Federal funds that would otherwise be available for 
     activities funded under this Act;
       (4) written assurances that all activities funded under 
     this Act will be supervised by qualified adults;
       (5) a plan for assuring that program activities will take 
     place in a secure environment that is free of crime and 
     drugs;
       (6) a plan outlining the utilization of content-based 
     programs such as PowerUp, and the provision of trained adult 
     personnel to supervise the after-school technology training; 
     and
       (7) any additional statistical or financial information 
     that the Boys and Girls Clubs of America may reasonably 
     require.

     SEC. 5. GRANT AWARDS.

       In awarding subgrants under this Act, the Boys and Girls 
     Clubs of America shall consider--
       (1) the ability of the applicant to provide the intended 
     services;
       (2) the history and establishment of the applicant in 
     providing youth activities; and
       (3) the extent to which services will be provided in crime-
     prone areas and technologically underserved populations, and 
     efforts to achieve an equitable geographic distribution of 
     the grant awards.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     $20,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2001 through 2006 to 
     carry out this Act.
       (b) Source of Funds.--Funds to carry out this Act may be 
     derived from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.
       (c) Continued Availability.--Amounts made available under 
     this section shall remain available until expended.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Abraham, Mr. Baucus, 
        Mr. Cleland, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Levin, and Mr. Sessions):
  S. 2062. A bill to amend chapter 4 of title 39, United States Code, 
to allow postal patrons to contribute to funding for organ and tissue 
donation awareness through the voluntary purchase of certain specially 
issued United States postage stamps; to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs.


       ORGAN AND TISSUE DONATION AWARENESS ``SEMI-POSTAL'' STAMP

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I am pleased to be here today with my 
friend and colleague from Illinois, Senator Durbin, to introduce 
legislation that would authorize the issuance of the organ and tissue 
donation awareness ``semi-postal'' stamp. With 67,000 people on the 
organ donation waiting list, we have no time to lose in educating the 
public about the importance of life-giving organ and tissue donations.
  In August 1998, as a result of strong public and congressional 
interest, the U.S. Postal Service issued a 32-cent organ and tissue 
donation commemorative stamp. But, just five months later, the postal 
rate increased to 33-cents. To use the stamp, that meant purchasers 
would have to buy an additional one-cent stamp to make up the postage 
difference. Yet, despite this hassle, more than 47 million of the 50 
million stamps originally printed have been purchased, demonstrating 
the strong demand for an organ and tissue donation awareness postage 
stamp.
  Since the U.S. Postal Service does not re-issue commemorative stamps, 
we are seeking authorization for a ``semi-postal'' stamp. This stamp 
would sell for up to 25 percent above the value of a first-class stamp, 
regardless of the price of the first-class stamp, itself. The surplus 
revenues would be directed to programs that increase organ and tissue 
donation awareness. The decision to donate an organ or tissue is a 
life-saving one. However, it is frequently one that family members and 
loved ones fail to communicate to one another. Every effort we make to 
remind people that this is a decision that should be communicated 
before a tragedy strikes is an effort toward saving lives. Whether it 
is an organ and tissue donation postage stamp or a box that drivers can 
mark as they renew their drivers' licenses, they are steps that raise 
awareness of the importance of communicating to family and friends the 
decision to become an organ or tissue donor.
  I would like to thank my colleague, Senator Durbin, for joining me in 
introducing this legislation, and Senators Abraham, Baucus, Cleland, 
Dodd, and Levin for their co-sponsorship. I have appreciated their 
support for this bill and for their tremendous work on behalf of organ 
and tissue donation awareness. I would also like to thank a number of 
organ and tissue donation groups who support this legislation--the 
Minority Organ Tissue Transplant Education Program (MOTTEP); the 
National Kidney Foundation (NKF); the United Network for Organ Sharing 
(UNOS); Transplant Recipients International Organization, Inc. (TRIO); 
the Coalition on Donation; Hadassah; the Eye Bank Association of 
America; the American Society of Transplantation; the American Society 
of Transplant Surgeons; LifeBanc; and the Association of Organ 
Procurement Organizations.
  I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this important 
legislation. Time is of the essence. The waiting list for organs 
includes 67,000 people, with a new name added to that list every 16 
minutes. Moreover, ten to twelve people die every day waiting for an 
organ to become available. There is simply no time to lose. Every 
effort we make to increase, and in this case help generate, funds for 
organ and tissue donation awareness will help to save someone's life.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 
legislation be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2062

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

     SECTION 1. SPECIAL POSTAGE STAMPS TO BENEFIT ORGAN AND TISSUE 
                   DONATION AWARENESS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 4 of title 39, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 414 the following:

     ``Sec. 414a. Special postage stamps for organ and tissue 
       donation awareness

       ``(a) In order to afford the public a convenient way to 
     contribute to funding for organ

[[Page 1098]]

     and tissue donation awareness, the Postal Service shall 
     establish a special rate of postage for first-class mail 
     under this section.
       ``(b) The rate of postage established under this section--
       ``(1) shall be equal to the regular first-class rate of 
     postage, plus a differential of not to exceed 25 percent;
       ``(2) shall be set by the Governors in accordance with such 
     procedures as the Governors shall by regulation prescribe (in 
     lieu of the procedures under chapter 36); and
       ``(3) shall be offered as an alternative to the regular 
     first-class rate of postage.
       ``(c) The use of the special rate of postage established 
     under this section shall be voluntary on the part of postal 
     patrons.
       ``(d)(1) The Postal Service shall pay the amounts becoming 
     available for organ and tissue donation awareness under this 
     section to the Department of Health and Human Services for 
     organ and tissue donation awareness programs. Payments under 
     this paragraph to the Department of Health and Human Services 
     shall be made under such arrangements as the Postal Service 
     shall by mutual agreement with the Department establish in 
     order to carry out the purposes of this section, except that, 
     under those arrangements, payments to the Department shall be 
     made at least twice a year. In consultation with donor 
     organizations and other members of the transplant community, 
     the Department of Health and Human Services may make any 
     funds paid to the Department under this section available to 
     donor organizations and other members of the transplant 
     community for donor awareness programs.
       ``(2) For purposes of this section, the term `amounts 
     becoming available for organ and tissue donation awareness 
     under this section' means--
       ``(A) the total amounts received by the Postal Service that 
     it would not have received but for the enactment of this 
     section, reduced by
       ``(B) an amount sufficient to cover reasonable costs 
     incurred by the Postal Service in carrying out this section, 
     including those attributable to the printing, sale, and 
     distribution of stamps under this section,
     as determined by the Postal Service under regulations that 
     the Postal Service shall prescribe.
       ``(e) It is the sense of Congress that nothing in this 
     section should--
       ``(1) directly or indirectly cause a net decrease in total 
     funds received by the Department of Health and Human Services 
     or any other agency of the Government (or any component or 
     program thereof) below the level that would otherwise have 
     been received but for the enactment of this section; or
       ``(2) affect regular first-class rates of postage or any 
     other regular rates of postage.
       ``(f) Special postage stamps under this section shall be 
     made available to the public beginning on such date as the 
     Postal Service shall by regulation prescribe, but in no event 
     later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this 
     section.
       ``(g) The Postmaster General shall include in each report 
     rendered under section 2402 with respect to any period during 
     any portion of which this section is in effect information 
     concerning the operation of this section, except that, at a 
     minimum, each shall include--
       ``(1) the total amount described in subsection (d)(2)(A) 
     which was received by the Postal Service during the period 
     covered by such report; and
       ``(2) of the amount under paragraph (1), how much (in the 
     aggregate and by category) was required for the purposes 
     described in subsection (d)(2)(B).
       ``(h) This section shall cease to be effective at the end 
     of the 2-year period beginning on the date on which special 
     postage stamps under this section are first made available to 
     the public.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Table of sections.--The table of sections for chapter 4 
     of title 39, United States Code, is amended by striking the 
     item relating to section 414 and inserting the following:

``414. Special postage stamps to benefit breast cancer research.
``414a. Special postage stamps to benefit organ and tissue donation 
              awareness.''.
       (2) Section heading.--The heading for section 414 of title 
     39, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 414. Special postage stamps to benefit breast cancer 
       research''.

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. EDWARDS (for himself and Mr. Biden):
  S. 2064. A bill to amend the Missing Children's Assistance Act, to 
expand the purpose of the National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children to cover individuals who are at least 18 but have not yet 
attained the age of 22; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
                                 ______
                                 


                       abducted young adults act

      By Mr. EDWARDS:
  S. 2065. A bill to authorize the Attorney General to provide grants 
for organizations to find missing adults; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


                             kristen's law

 Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, today I introduce two bills that 
are very important crime fighting measures. My legislation will help 
provide law enforcement with additional assistance in locating missing 
people. One bill, the ``Abducted Young Adults Act,'' will give the 
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children the legal authority 
to assist law enforcement officers in locating abducted young adults 
aged 18 through 21. The second bill, ``Kristen's Law,'' authorizes the 
Attorney General to provide grants to public agencies and nonprofit 
private organizations that help find missing adults.
  Mr. President, let me tell you a story about a girl from my State of 
North Carolina. Her name is Kristen Modafferi. Kristen was a bright, 
hard-working student at North Carolina State University. After 
finishing up her freshman year of college, she traveled to San 
Francisco to spend the summer taking a photography class at Berkeley. 
Once Kristen arrived in San Francisco, she started her class and got a 
couple of jobs to help pay for her expenses. She was settling in and 
making friends.
  On Monday, June 23, 1997, Kristen left work to visit a local beach. 
She has not been seen since. Kristen was three weeks over the age of 18 
when she disappeared.
  Law enforcement devoted a great deal of time to finding Kristen and 
should be commended for their efforts. Despite a number of leads, 
Kristen has never been found.
  For 15 years, since the creation of the National Center for Missing 
and Exploited Children, our Nation has recognized the vulnerability of 
young children to abductions and exploitation. We have provided the 
funding and support vital to ensuring rapid and multi jurisdictional 
responses to these cases. But in Kristen's case we could not--and all 
because she was 3 weeks past her 18th birthday. The charter for the 
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children only allows the 
Center to help law enforcement search for missing children aged 0 to 
18.
  When a person involuntarily disappears, time is of the essence. 
Search efforts must begin quickly, and they must reach across 
jurisdictions. Abducted youngsters are often taken across state lines. 
In order to effectively coordinate a search, the groups conducting the 
search must have an easy way to share information with each other, no 
matter how far away from one another they may be. The greater the 
number of agencies helping in the search, the more likely it is that 
the person will be found. But there is no central, federally-
established organization that exists to aid law enforcement in their 
efforts to locate missing 18-21 year-olds. Unfortunately, Kristen's 
tragic story illustrates the need for such an organization. And what 
better way to fill this need than to build upon a reputable, federally-
partnered organization--the National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children--that already exists to search for missing individuals under 
18?
  The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children serves as the 
national clearinghouse for information on missing children and the 
prevention of child victimization. The Center works in partnership with 
the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention at the U.S. 
Department of Justice, and its mission is codified in federal law.
  Because the Center was established for the purpose of assisting with 
cases that involve missing children under the age of 18, the Center 
does not typically assist with cases involving involuntarily missing 
college students and other people who happen to be 18 through 21 years 
old. The sad fact is that had Kristen been just a few weeks younger 
when she disappeared, the Center would have immediately mobilized to 
start a search.
  One of the measures I introduce today, The Abducted Young Adults Act, 
would expand the Center's charter to allow it to use its expertise and 
resources to help find involuntarily missing young adults in the 18 
through 21 year-old age group.

[[Page 1099]]

  Mr. President, some people might inquire why I chose to limit 
expansion of the Center's mission by only covering individuals under 
age 22. For example, my bill would not affect the Center's ability to 
help police search for Kristen's sister Allison and other individuals 
who are 22 and over. The second bill I am introducing today, Kristen's 
Act, will help fill this gap. I will discuss that bill in a moment. 
However, the reason for my decision to limit the expansion of the 
Center's mission is twofold.
  First, although a person is considered a legal adult when they attain 
the age of 18, I think most people would agree that college-aged kids 
are just that--kids. Members of this age group are particularly 
vulnerable to criminals and are frequently victims of crime. They are 
away from home for the first time in their lives, in an unfamiliar 
area, without the presence of their parents. I believe that most people 
would agree that this age group needs special protection.
  Statistics demonstrate the need to address the issue of missing young 
adults and to find a way to provide some additional resources for this 
group. In fact, according to data from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 
Sheriff's office in my state of North Carolina, in 1999, they received 
reports of 132 missing persons aged 18-21. That's the number for just 
one city, in just one state in the country. If we were to amass similar 
statistics for every jurisdiction across the country, I believe we 
would be astounded at the high rate of disappearances for this age 
group. For example, in February, 1999, the FBI reported 1,896 new cases 
of missing 18 through 21-year-olds--1,896 new cases in just one month. 
This is a frighteningly large number. And I believe that the Abducted 
Young Adults Act is a necessary protective measure. It will provide 
some comfort to the millions of parents who send their children to 
college every year and worry about their safety: If anything does 
happen, a national effort will be mobilized to help.
  The second reason that the legislation would apply to a limited age 
group is that I believe the National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children should stay focused on its central mission--to help search for 
missing children.
  Since its founding, the Center has helped recover nearly 48,000 
children. Imagine the benefit to families and law enforcement if the 
Center were to help search for abducted young adults. Surely the number 
of active missing young adult cases would decline if the Center helped 
with the search efforts. I believe my legislation is a logical 
extension of the Center's current mission.
  My bill would authorize appropriations of $2.5 million per year 
through 2003 so that the Center does not have to divert any of the 
funding it needs to effectively search for children. I have worked 
closely with the Center's staff to ensure that my bill will enhance not 
harm the Center's current mission. As a result, the Abducted Young 
Adults Act is fully supported by the Center.
  The Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) also strongly supports my 
legislation. Gilbert Gallegos, National President of the FOP, is a 
member of the Board of Directors for the Center. As he so aptly states 
in his letter of support for the bill, ``Just because you turn eighteen 
is no guarantee that you will not be the victim of a crime.''
  Mr. President, I believe that it is important to mention that it is 
true that some individuals aged 18 through 21 may disappear because 
they want to. Some of these individuals may live in abusive households. 
Others may want to start a new life. And because they are considered 
legal adults, they have the choice to remain missing. In these cases, 
it may not make sense for law enforcement, the Center, or anyone else 
to launch a search.
  My legislation ensures that the National Center for Missing and 
Exploited Children will use its public resources to search for only 
those missing young adults aged 18-21 that law enforcement has first 
determined to be missing involuntarily.
  Specifically, my bill says that in order for an individual to be 
defined as an involuntarily missing young adult, the following criteria 
must be met: (1) their whereabouts must be unknown to their parent or 
guardian; (2) law enforcement must have entered a missing persons 
report on the individual into the National Crime Information Center; 
and (3) there must be a reasonable indication or suspicion that the 
individual has been abducted or is missing under circumstances 
suggesting foul play or a threat to life; or (4) the individual is 
known to be suicidal or has a severe medical condition that poses a 
threat to his or her life.
  I believe that the Abducted Young Adults Act is a common-sense way to 
help prevent further incidences like the one involving Kristen 
Modafferi. For every child the Center assists in locating, there are a 
handful of individuals that it cannot help find. If my bill enables the 
Center to help find just one more missing youngster, then I believe the 
bill will have succeeded in its goal.
  I am pleased that the Abducted Young Adults Act is co-sponsored by 
Senator Biden. Senator Biden was instrumental to the establishment of 
the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and I thank him 
for his leadership and support.
  Mr. President, the Abducted Young Adults Act is only one part of the 
solution. The other part of the solution is to provide the 
organizations that are devoted to searching for missing adults with the 
resources they need to be more effective in their efforts to search for 
all adults, regardless of age.
  That is why I am also introducing Kristen's Law, named after Kristen 
Modafferi. This bill has been introduced in the House of 
Representatives by Representative Sue Myrick, and I thank her for her 
involvement in this issue.
  As I mentioned, Kristen's Law would allow the Attorney General to 
make grants to public agencies or nonprofit private organizations to 
assist law enforcement and families in locating missing adults. Grants 
could also be used by these agencies and organizations for a number of 
other reasons. For example, funds could be used to maintain a national, 
interconnected database for the purpose of tracking missing adults who 
are determined by law enforcement to be endangered due to age, 
diminished mental capacity, or the circumstances of disappearance. And 
the grants could be used to help establish a national clearinghouse for 
missing adults and to assist with victim advocacy related to missing 
adults.
  Generally, the greater the number of people conducting a search, the 
greater the chance is of locating missing individuals. The combination 
of the Abducted Young Adults Act and Kristen's Law sends a message to 
families that they deserve all of the help necessary to locate 
endangered and involuntarily missing loved ones. Together, these bills 
will help ensure that all endangered and involuntarily missing adults--
regardless of age--will receive not only the benefit of search efforts 
by law enforcement, but also by experienced, specialized organizations.
  I request that the text of the two bills be printed in the Record.
  The material follows:

                                S. 2064

       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 ``Abducted Young Adults Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS IN REGARD TO VULNERABLE INVOLUNTARILY 
                   MISSING YOUNG ADULTS.

       (a) Conforming Amendments.--Section 402 of the Missing 
     Children's Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5771) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``these children'' 
     the following: ``and involuntarily missing young adults'';
       (2) in paragraph (3), by inserting after ``these children'' 
     the following: ``and involuntarily missing young adults'';
       (3) in paragraph (4), by inserting after ``many missing 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults'';
       (4) in paragraph (6), by inserting after ``abducted 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults''; and
       (5) in paragraph (7)--
       (A) by inserting after ``leads in missing children'' the 
     following: ``and involuntarily missing young adults''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``where the child'' the following: 
     ``or involuntarily missing young adult''.

[[Page 1100]]

       (b) Additional Findings.--Section 402 of the Missing 
     Children's Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5771) is amended by--
       (1) redesignating paragraphs (2) through (21) as paragraphs 
     (3) through (22), respectively; and
       (2) inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) each year many young adults are abducted or are 
     involuntarily missing under circumstances which immediately 
     place them in grave danger;''.

     SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF PURPOSE OF NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING 
                   AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN.

       Section 403 of the Missing Children's Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5772) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (4) and (5), respectively; and
       (2) by adding after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) the term `involuntarily missing young adult' means 
     any individual who is at least 18 but has not attained the 
     age of 22 whose whereabouts are unknown to such individual's 
     parent or guardian if law enforcement determines--
       ``(A) there is a reasonable indication or suspicion that 
     the individual has been abducted or is missing under 
     circumstances suggesting foul play or a threat to life; or
       ``(B) the individual is known to be suicidal or has a 
     severe medical condition that poses a threat to his or her 
     life;
       ``(3) the term `young adult' means any individual who is at 
     least 18 but has not attained the age of 22;''.

     SEC. 4. DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR IN REGARD 
                   TO INVOLUNTARILY MISSING YOUNG ADULTS.

       Section 404 of the Missing Children's Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5773) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``missing 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults'';
       (B) in paragraph (5)(A), by inserting after ``missing 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults'';
       (C) in paragraph (5)(B), by inserting after ``missing 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults'';
       (D) in paragraph (5)(C), by--
       (i) inserting after ``missing children'' the following: 
     ``or involuntarily missing young adults''; and
       (ii) inserting after ``or to children'' the following: ``or 
     involuntarily missing young adults''; and
       (E) in paragraph (5)(I)(iv), by inserting after ``missing 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)(i), by--
       (i) inserting after ``regarding the location of any'' the 
     following: ``involuntarily missing young adult or''; and
       (ii) inserting after ``reunite such child with such child's 
     legal custodian'' the following: ``, or request information 
     pertaining to procedures necessary to notify law enforcement 
     about such involuntarily missing young adult'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C)(i), by inserting after ``children 
     and their families'' the following: ``and involuntarily 
     missing young adults and their families'';
       (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (E), (F), and (G) as 
     subparagraphs (F), (G), and (H), respectively;
       (D) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
       ``(E) to coordinate public and private programs which 
     locate or recover involuntarily missing young adults;'';
       (E) in subparagraph (F), as redesignated, by inserting 
     after ``missing and exploited children'' the following: ``and 
     involuntarily missing young adults;'';
       (F) in subparagraph (G), as redesignated by inserting after 
     ``missing and exploited children'' the following: ``and 
     involuntarily missing young adults''; and
       (G) in subparagraph (H), as redesignated, by inserting 
     after ``missing and exploited children'' the following: ``and 
     involuntarily missing young adults,''; and
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) paragraph (1), by inserting after ``number of 
     children'' each place it appears (except after ``who are 
     victims of parental kidnapings'') the following: ``and 
     involuntarily missing young adults''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``missing 
     children'' the following: ``and involuntarily missing young 
     adults''.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORITY OF ADMINISTRATOR TO MAKE GRANTS AND ENTER 
                   IN CONTRACTS RELATING TO INVOLUNTARILY MISSING 
                   YOUNG ADULTS.

       Section 405 of the Missing Children's Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5775) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by inserting after ``children,'' the first place it 
     appears the following: ``young adults,'';
       (ii) by inserting after ``children'' the second place it 
     appears the following: ``or involuntarily missing young 
     adults'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting after ``children'' the 
     following: ``or involuntarily missing young adults'';
       (C) in paragraph (3), by inserting after ``children'' the 
     following: ``or involuntarily missing young adults'';
       (D) in paragraph (4)--
       (i) in the matter before subparagraph (A), by inserting 
     after ``children'' the following: ``or involuntarily missing 
     young adults'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after ``child'' each 
     place it appears the following: ``or involuntarily missing 
     young adult''; and
       (iii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting after ``child'' the 
     following: ``or involuntarily missing young adult'';
       (E) in paragraph (5), by inserting after ``missing 
     children's'' the following: ``or involuntarily missing young 
     adults' '';
       (F) in paragraph (6), by inserting after ``children'' the 
     each place it appears the following: ``or involuntarily 
     missing young adults'';
       (G) in paragraph (7), by inserting after ``children'' each 
     place it appears the following: ``or involuntarily missing 
     young adults''; and
       (H) in paragraph (9), by inserting after ``children'' the 
     following: ``or involuntarily missing young adults''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after ``children'' 
     the first place it appears the following: ``or involuntarily 
     missing young adults'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting after ``services to'' 
     the following: ``involuntarily missing young adults,''; and
       (C) in subparagraph (C), by inserting after ``children'' 
     the following: ``or involuntarily missing young adults''.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 408(a) of the Missing Children's Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5777(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``In addition, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated $2,500,000 for fiscal years 2001 through 2003 to 
     carry out the provisions of the amendments made to this Act 
     by the Abducted Young Adults Act.''.

     SEC. 7. SPECIAL STUDY AND REPORT.

       (a) Study.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Office of 
     Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention shall begin to 
     conduct a study to determine the obstacles that prevent or 
     impede law enforcement from recovering involuntarily missing 
     young adults.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Office of 
     Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention shall submit a 
     report to the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the House of Representatives and the chairman of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate containing a 
     description, and a summary of the results, of the study 
     conducted under subsection (a).

     SEC. 8. REPORTING REQUIREMENT.

       Section 3701(a) of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
     5779) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``Each 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agency may report 
     each case of an involuntarily missing young adult reported to 
     such agency to the National Crime Information Center of the 
     Department of Justice.''.

     SEC. 9. STATE REQUIREMENTS.

       Section 3702 of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 
     5780) is amended by--
       (1) redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4);
       (2) inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) provide that each involuntarily missing young adult 
     report and all necessary and available information with 
     respect to such report, shall include--
       ``(A) the name, date of birth, sex, race, height, weight, 
     and eye and hair color of the involuntarily missing young 
     adult;
       ``(B) the date and location of the last known contact with 
     the involuntarily missing young adult; and
       ``(C) once the State agency receiving the case has made a 
     determination to enter such report into the State law 
     enforcement system and the National Crime Information Center 
     computer networks, and make such report available to the 
     Missing and Exploited Children Information Clearinghouse 
     within the State or other agency designated within the State 
     to receive such reports, shall immediately enter such report 
     and all necessary and available information described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B);'';
       (3) in paragraph (4), as redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting the following: ``paragraphs 
     (2) and (3)''; and
       (4) in paragraph (4)(C), as redesignated, by inserting 
     after ``missing children'' the following: ``and involuntarily 
     missing young adults''.
                                  ____


                                S. 2065

       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 ``Kristen's Law''.

     SEC. 2. GRANTS FOR THE ASSISTANCE OF ORGANIZATIONS TO FIND 
                   MISSING ADULTS.

       (a) In General.--The Attorney General may make grants to 
     public agencies or nonprofit private organizations, or 
     combinations thereof, for programs--
       (1) to assist law enforcement and families in locating 
     missing adults;
       (2) to maintain a national, interconnected database for the 
     purpose of tracking missing adults who are determined by law 
     enforcement to be endangered due to age, diminished mental 
     capacity, or the circumstances

[[Page 1101]]

     of disappearance, when foul play is suspected or 
     circumstances are unknown;
       (3) to maintain statistical information of adults reported 
     as missing;
       (4) to provide informational resources and referrals to 
     families of missing adults;
       (5) to assist in public notification and victim advocacy 
     related to missing adults; and
       (6) to establish and maintain a national clearinghouse for 
     missing adults.
       (b) Regulations.--The Attorney General may make such rules 
     and regulations as may be necessary to carry out this Act.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act $1,000,000 each year for fiscal years 2001 through 
     2004.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CLELAND:
  S. 2066. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 
United States savings bond income from gross income if used to pay 
long-term care expenses; to the Committee on Finance.


                 Tax-Exemption Savings Bond Legislation

 Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, to support Americans faced with 
long-term care needs I am proposing a savings bond tax credit. Many 
people are struggling to pay for the assistive care needs associated 
with conditions such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. An 
estimated 5.8 million Americans aged 65 or older need long-term care. 
Nursing home care is only one component of long-term care services that 
includes assisted living, adult day and home care. Medicare and health 
insurance do not cover long-term care. In 1995, federal and state 
spending for nursing home care was approximately $34 billion and an 
additional $21 billion was used for home care. It is projected that 
half of all women and a third of men in this country who are now age 65 
are likely to spend some time in their later years in a nursing home at 
a cost from $40,000 to $90,000 per person. About 40% of all nursing 
home expenses are paid for out-of-pocket by patients and/or family 
members. Liquidating family assets is often the only way for many to 
fund the high costs for care. These staggering statistics and the pleas 
for help from Americans in such situations reinforce the critical need 
for long-term care assistance.
  To qualify for this proposed tax credit, the person receiving care 
must have at least two limitations in activities of daily living or a 
comparable cognitive impairment. Activities of daily living, like 
eating, bathing, and toileting, are basic care needs that must be met. 
Families that claim parents or parents-in law as dependents on their 
tax returns can qualify for this tax credit if savings bonds are used 
to pay for long-term care services. ``Sandwich generation'' families 
paying for both college education for their children and long-term care 
services for their parents can use this tax credit for either program 
or a combined credit up to the maximum.
  Mr. President, I ask that this proposed measure to provide long-term 
care cost relief be printed in the Record.
  The bill follows:

                                S. 2066

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

     SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF UNITED STATES SAVINGS BOND INCOME 
                   FROM GROSS INCOME IF USED TO PAY LONG-TERM CARE 
                   EXPENSES.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 135 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to income from United 
     States savings bonds used to pay higher education tuition and 
     fees) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Exclusion.--
       ``(1) General rule.--In the case of an individual who pays 
     qualified expenses during the taxable year, no amount shall 
     be includible in gross income by reason of the redemption 
     during such year of any qualified United States savings bond.
       ``(2) Qualified expenses.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `qualified expenses' means--
       ``(A) qualified higher education expenses, and
       ``(B) eligible long-term care expenses.''.
       (b) Limitation where redemption proceeds exceed qualified 
     expenses.--Section 135(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (relating to limitation where redemption proceeds exceed 
     higher education expenses) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``higher education'' in subparagraph 
     (A)(ii), and
       (2) by striking ``higher education'' in the heading 
     thereof.
       (c) Eligible Long-Term Care Expenses.--Section 135(c) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definitions) 
     is amended by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5) 
     and by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Eligible long-term care expenses.--The term `eligible 
     long-term care expenses' means qualified long-term care 
     expenses (as defined in section 7702B(c)) and eligible long-
     term care premiums (as defined in section 213(d)(10)) of--
       ``(A) the taxpayer,
       ``(B) the taxpayer's spouse, or
       ``(C) any dependent of the taxpayer with respect to whom 
     the taxpayer is allowed a deduction under section 151.''.
       (d) Adjustments.--Section 135(d) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to special rules) is amended by 
     redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (4) and 
     (5), respectively, and by inserting after paragraph (2) the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Eligible long-term care expense adjustments.--The 
     amount of eligible long-term care expenses otherwise taken 
     into account under subsection (a) with respect to an 
     individual shall be reduced (before the application of 
     subsection (b)) by the sum of--
       ``(A) any amount paid for qualified long-term care services 
     (as defined in section 7702B(c)) provided to such individual 
     and described in section 213(d)(11), plus
       ``(B) any amount received by the taxpayer or the taxpayer's 
     spouse or dependents for the payment of eligible long-term 
     care expenses which is excludable from gross income.''.
       (e) Coordination With Deductions.--
       (1) Section 213 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     (relating to medical, dental, etc., expenses) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Coordination With Savings Bond Income Used for 
     Expenses.--Any expense taken into account in determining the 
     exclusion under section 135 shall not be treated as an 
     expense paid for medical care.''.
       (2) Section 162(l) of such Code (relating to special rules 
     for health insurance costs of self-employed individuals) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Coordination with savings bond income used for 
     expenses.--Any expense taken into account in determining the 
     exclusion under section 135 shall not be treated as an 
     expense paid for medical care.''.
       (f) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) The heading for section 135 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ``AND LONG-TERM CARE 
     EXPENSES'' after ``FEES''.
       (2) The item relating to section 135 in the table of 
     sections for part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such 
     Code is amended by inserting ``and long-term care expenses'' 
     after ``fees''.
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1999.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRIST (for himself and Mr. Abraham):
  S. 2067. A bill to provide education and training for the information 
age; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


               america's math and science excellence act

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce America's Math and 
Science Excellence Act that will keep the United States on the cutting 
edge of the Information Technology (IT) revolution. If we are to 
prepare our children to meet the demands of our future workforce, we 
must dedicate ourselves to strengthening math and science literacy. 
America's Math and Science Excellence Act would authorize funding for 
math and science education and training through a series of grants 
awarded by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute 
of Standards and Technology. This bill would create a long-term 
strategy to ensure that the IT industry is employing American students 
who are prepared to enter the workforce with sufficient math and 
science skills necessary to compete both domestically and 
internationally.
  The Third International Math and Science Study, the most 
comprehensive and rigorous comparison of quantitative skills across 
nations, reveals that the longer our students stay in the elementary 
and public school system, the worse they perform on standardized tests. 
Their average tests scores continue to drop from the fourth to the 
twelfth grade. The rapidly changing technology revolution demands 
skills and proficiency in mathematics, science, and technology. IT, 
perhaps the fastest growing sector of our economy, relies on more than 
basic high school literacy in mathematics and science.
  This bipartisan legislation targets three specific goals: 
establishing teacher training and development outreach, providing 
internship opportunities for

[[Page 1102]]

students in secondary and higher education, and assisting graduate 
math, science, and engineering students. America's Math and Science 
Excellence Act gives priority to applicants who obtain private sector 
or state matching funds. We must encourage private industry to not only 
get involved in the education of the future workforce, but also to help 
direct and guide it.
  According to a study by the CEO Forum on Education and Technology, 
our schools spend an average of $88 per student on computers and only 
$6 on teacher training. And while the nation's 87,000 schools have 
approximately six million computers and about 80 percent of the schools 
have Internet access, the report stated that few teachers are ready to 
use the technology in their lessons. This is a national tragedy. During 
the past ten years, we have seen a transformation in classrooms 
throughout the country. Computers have replaced blackboards and 
students now depend on the Internet for basic knowledge. Yet teachers 
are not equipped to incorporate technological tools into their 
curricula.
  The ``IT Teacher Training Grants'' created by this legislation 
support professional advancement in the related fields of IT for 
teachers who instruct elementary, secondary, or charter school 
students. These grants may be used for teacher salaries, fees for 
attending special conferences, workshops, or training sessions. They 
may also be used for the development of a compensation system that 
rewards excellence in math and science related areas. In administering 
these grants, the National Science Foundation shall give priority 
consideration to schools that score in the 25th percentile or below for 
academic performance according to their respective state standards, and 
programs that provide matching funds from the private sector.
  The ``Twenty-First Century Workforce Internship Grants'' will consist 
of awards to students in secondary schools, as well as students from 
institutions of higher learning to explore internships in IT. The goal 
of this program is to transition students' math and science skills into 
the new digital workforce. By providing them with opportunities to 
explore the private sector, these grants will enable the next 
generation of labor to experience the IT professional domain, while 
maintaining their knowledge and proficiency in basic math, science, and 
engineering skills.
  The national demand for computer scientists, computer engineers, and 
systems analysts by 2006 is projected to be more than double our 
current capacity. In addition, the supply of new graduates qualified 
for these positions is expected to fall significantly short of the 
number needed. This deficiency of qualified workers in the United 
States is due in part to a lack of students pursuing advanced degrees 
in mathematics, science, and engineering technology. The number of 
degrees in technical science and engineering fields awarded by American 
institutions of higher learning has declined dramatically since 1990. 
Foreign national students in the United States were awarded 47 percent 
of Doctorate degrees in engineering, 38 percent of Master's degrees, 
and 46 percent of Doctorate degrees in computer science in 1996. The 
``IT State Scholarship Program,'' established in this legislation, 
targets individual states to provide them with supplementary 
scholarships for students who want to pursue graduate and doctoral 
degrees in math, science, engineering, or related fields. Two-thirds of 
these funds shall be awarded to students from low-income families. 
Furthermore, the director of the National Science Foundation shall 
award these grants to states who provide at least one half of the cost 
of grant.
  Finally, this act will reauthorize the National Institutes of 
Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop a Twenty-First Century 
Teacher Enhancement Program. This initiative was originally written 
into statute as part of the ``Technology Administration Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1999.'' However, we have yet to see the 
implementation of this program. So I will again request through 
legislation that NIST establish summer program to provide professional 
development for elementary and secondary math and science teachers. I 
continue to believe that offering teachers opportunities to participate 
in ``hands-on'' experiences at NIST laboratories would be invaluable to 
their understanding of math and science. Not only would this program 
develop and improve their teaching strategies and self-confidence in 
instructing math and science, but it would also demonstrate their 
impact on commerce.
  We cannot continue to marvel at our robust economy without also 
looking toward the next century and developing a plan to sustain it. 
The reality is simple: we must prepare our students to enter the 
workforce and to prosper in the new digital economy. It is not enough 
to put computers in every classroom if our nation's teachers cannot 
implement them effectively into their daily lesson plans. Educating our 
children and the teachers who instruct them is essential to our 
economic future.
  Mr. President, I strongly believe that each of the programs within 
America's Math and Science Excellence Act will encourage state and 
local educators, as well as private industry, to engage themselves in 
the fight to increase basic math and science literacy. These grants 
target specific long-term deficiencies in the IT workforce shortage and 
will help create innovative solutions to our current national dilemma. 
I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of this critical piece 
of legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GREGG:
  S. 2068. A bill to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission 
from establishing rules authorizing the operation of new, low power FM 
radio stations; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


            the radio broadcasting presentation act of 2000

 Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Radio 
Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000. On January 20, 2000, the FCC 
approved a new non-commercial low-power FM (LPFM) radio service. In 
order for LPFM stations to fit in the FM band, the FCC will have to 
significantly weaken the existing interference protections it developed 
and has subscribed to for decades. The public commentary and technical 
analysis shows that LPFM will cause interference with current FM 
stations, and thus result in a loss of service to listeners. It is 
imperative that the integrity of the spectrum is protected and that all 
individuals have access to local news, weather and emergency 
information free from interference. Both public and commercial radio 
stations are opposed to the FCC's proposal in its current form.
  These new FCC rules are inconsistent with sound spectrum management. 
I believe that this issue requires further study, as well as 
Congressional hearings, to fully examine the impact that LPFM would 
have on existing FM radio service. Therefore, I am introducing the 
Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act. This legislation would repeal any 
prescribed rules authorizing LPFM and revoke LPFM licenses that may be 
issued prior to the date of enactment of this bill.
  While the desire to provide a forum for community groups to have a 
greater voice is laudable, a multitude of alternatives already exist. 
Currently, groups may obtain commercial or noncommercial radio 
licenses, use public access cable, publish newsletters, and utilize 
Internet web sites and e-mail. It is important that our efforts to 
create more opportunities for those who support LPFM do not lead to the 
denial of access for others who depend on FM radio for safety, news, 
and entertainment. For instance, inexpensive and older radios, 
particularly vulnerable to interference and most commonly used by low-
income and elderly listeners, will sustain the greatest negative impact 
caused by LPFM.
  Furthermore, it is not clear whether the relaxation of first, second, 
or third adjacent channel protection standards will have an adverse 
effect on the transition to digital radio. Unlike television 
broadcasters, who are being

[[Page 1103]]

given additional free spectrum to broadcast in digital format, radio 
broadcasters must use the current spectrum allocations to transmit both 
digital and analog signals, making adjacent channel safeguards all the 
more important. At a minimum, adding a large number of LPFMs to the 
already congested FM band will make the transition to digital radio 
increasingly difficult and problematic.
  Finally, the new low-power proposal makes formerly unlicensed, pirate 
radio operators eligible for LPFM licenses. This ruling re-enforces 
their unlawful behavior and encourages future illegal activity by 
opening the door to new unauthorized broadcasters. The introduction of 
thousands of LPFM stations not only rewards illegal activity, but is 
certain to undermine the integrity of the radio spectrum, interfering 
with current FM service and penalizing the listening public. The radio 
programming supplied to listeners by existing radio stations provides 
crucial news, weather, and emergency information, as well as cultural 
entertainment, which must be preserved.
  I ask that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. The bill 
follows:

                                S. 2068

       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 ``Radio Broadcasting 
     Preservation Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION.

       (a) Rules Prohibited.--Notwithstanding section 303 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 303), the Federal 
     Communications Commission shall not prescribe rules 
     authorizing the operation of new, low power FM radio 
     stations, or establishing a low power radio service, as 
     proposed in MM Docket No. 99-25.
       (b) Termination of Previously Prescribed Rules.--Any rules 
     prescribed by the Federal Communications Commission before 
     the date of the enactment of this Act that would be in 
     violation of the prohibition in subsection (a) if prescribed 
     after such date shall cease to be effective on such date. Any 
     low power radio licenses issued pursuant to such rules before 
     such date shall be void.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FITZGERALD (for himself and Mrs. Lincoln):
  S. 2070. A bill to improve safety standards for child restraints in 
motor vehicles; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.


                 THE CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY ACT OF 2000

  Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, today, I am introducing legislation 
that will help us fight one of the leading killers of America's 
children--the automobile collision. Car crashes account for 1 of every 
3 deaths among children.
  In the United States we lose an average of 7 of our children every 
day to car collisions. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway 
Safety, crash injuries are the leading cause of death for the 5 to 12 
year old age group. Regrettably, up to half of the deaths involve 
children who already are buckled up or restrained in car seats and 
booster seats.
  That is why I am introducing legislation to substantially improve the 
child safety seats that we buy to protect our children. My bill, ``The 
Child Passenger Safety Act of 2000,'' would direct the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration to improve the safety features of car 
seats, to upgrade the way we test and certify car seats, to consider 
adopting measures to better protect older children, and to give parents 
the information they need to shop for, and install, safe car seats for 
their children.
  Over the years, NHTSA has implemented many measures to improve child 
passenger safety. I applaud, in particular, the NHTSA Administrator's 
recent efforts to implement a new tether requirement for child seat 
makers and automobile manufacturers.
  But we cannot allow these past successes to obscure a fundamental 
fact: too many of our children are killed or injured in car crashes 
every day. We should not wait to begin upgrading the safety of child 
car seats and booster seats.
  The first thing this bill seeks to do is to improve the testing of 
car seats and booster seats. It calls for the government to consider 
using more dummies that simulate children of many different ages in 
these tests. A six-month old has a very different build than an 
eighteen-month-old, and an eighteen-month-old is very different from a 
six-year old. In Europe, they use as many as six different child 
dummies in testing their car seats and booster seats, ranging in age 
from newborn to ten years. In this country, we do not crash test child 
safety seats with dummies that represent a premature infant, an 
eighteen-month-old or a ten-year-old.
  Currently, we test car seats on a sled. My bill directs NHTSA to put 
car seats in some of the actual cars that already are being tested 
under an existing program. Under this program, called the ``New Car 
Assessment Program,'' the government buys 40 or so vehicles and crash 
tests them to see how each would perform in a collision in the real 
world. Why, Mr. President, could we not put at least one car seat or 
booster seat in each of these cars? Doing it would help us better 
understand how these safety seats perform in the real world.
  In addition, my bill calls for the government to study ways to update 
the seat bench that is used in tests of child safety seats to better 
reflect the design of modern vehicles. The seat bench from a 1975 Chevy 
Impala with lap belts is what we now use to test car seats.
  I am also asking the government to focus attention on how car seats 
and booster seats perform in rollover, rear-impact, and side-impact 
crashes, as they do in Europe. These types of crashes are not as common 
as frontal collisions, but they result in a number of injuries and 
deaths. Finally, my proposal calls upon NHTSA to increase the funds 
they spend on testing car seats each year to at least $750,000, from 
the current $500,000.
  Second, we must deal with the problem of head injuries in side-impact 
crashes and rollovers. Children's heads and necks are even more 
vulnerable than those of adults, because children's heads are larger in 
proportion to the rest of their bodies. In Europe, car seats have side 
impact padding to better protect children's heads in these types of 
crashes. My bill would require car seat manufacturers in the U.S. to 
provide the same type of protection.
  Third, we must focus more attention on an issue that auto safety 
advocates have dubbed ``the forgotten child'' problem. The ``forgotten 
children'' (ages 8-12) have outgrown their car seats but do not fit 
properly in adult seat belts. In crashes, they are at greater risk than 
other passengers. My bill calls for NHTSA to close this child safety 
seat gap, but it leaves it up to NHTSA to decide when and how to do 
that. The agency could, for example, encourage the states to pass more 
laws requiring the use of booster seats for older children. They could 
do it by mounting a public information campaign about the importance of 
booster seats. Or they could amend our safety standards for seat belts.
  Fourth and finally, we must get more information to parents about the 
safety of various car seats on the market today, as well, Mr. 
President, as on the correct means of installing car seats. My bill 
directs NHTSA to institute a new crash test results information system 
that will help equip parents with the safety information and knowledge 
they need to make rational choices when they are buying and installing 
car seats for their children. My bill also requires that the warning 
labels on child seats be straightforward and written in plain English.
  Next week is National Child Passenger Safety Week. What better time 
than now to make these efforts to protect our children? I urge my 
colleagues to support this vitally important 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. 2070

       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 Passenger Protection 
     Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--

[[Page 1104]]

       (1) each day, an average of 7 children are killed and 866 
     injured in motor vehicle crashes;
       (2) certain standards and testing procedures for child 
     restraints in the United States are not as rigorous as those 
     in some other countries;
       (3) although the Federal Government establishes safety 
     standards for child restraints, the Federal Government--
       (A) permits companies that manufacture child restraints to 
     conduct their own tests for compliance with the safety 
     standards and interpret the results of those tests, but does 
     not require that the manufacturers make the results of the 
     tests public;
       (B) has not updated test standards for child restraints--
       (i) to reflect the modern designs of motor vehicles in use 
     as of the date of enactment of this Act;
       (ii) to take into account the effects of a side-impact 
     crash, a rear-impact crash, or a rollover crash; and
       (iii) to require the use of anthropomorphic devices that 
     accurately reflect the heights and masses of children at ages 
     other than newborn, 9 months, 3 years, and 6 years; and
       (C) has not issued motor vehicle safety standards that 
     adequately protect children up to the age of 12 who weigh 
     more than 50 pounds; and
       (4) the Federal Government should update the test standards 
     for child restraints to reduce the number of children killed 
     or injured in automobile accidents in the United States.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Child restraint.--The term ``child restraint'' has the 
     meaning given the term ``child restraint system'' in section 
     571.213 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (as in 
     effect on the date of enactment of this Act).
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Transportation.

     SEC. 4. TESTING OF CHILD RESTRAINTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall update and improve 
     crash test standards and conditions for child restraints.
       (b) Elements for Consideration.--In carrying out subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall consider--
       (1) whether to conduct more comprehensive and dynamic 
     testing of child restraints than is typically conducted as of 
     the date of enactment of this Act, including the use of test 
     platforms designed--
       (A) to simulate an array of accident conditions, such as 
     side-impact crashes, rear-impact crashes, and rollover 
     crashes; and
       (B) to reflect the designs of passenger motor vehicles in 
     use as of the date of enactment of this Act;
       (2) whether to use an increased number of anthropomorphic 
     devices in a greater variety of heights and masses; and
       (3) whether to provide improved protection in motor vehicle 
     accidents for children up to 59.2 inches tall who weigh more 
     than 50 pounds.
       (c) Required Elements.--In carrying out subsection (a), the 
     Secretary shall--
       (1) require that manufacturers design child restraints to 
     minimize head injuries during side-impact and rollover 
     crashes, including requiring that child restraints have side-
     impact protection;
       (2) include a child restraint in each vehicle crash-tested 
     under the New Car Assessment Program of the Department of 
     Transportation; and
       (3) prescribe readily understandable text for any labels 
     that are required to be placed on child restraints.
       (d) Funding.--For each fiscal year, of the funds made 
     available to the Secretary for activities relating to safety, 
     not less than $750,000 shall be made available to carry out 
     crash testing of child restraints.

     SEC. 5. CHILD RESTRAINT SAFETY RATING PROGRAM.

       Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall develop and implement a safety 
     rating program for child restraints to provide practicable, 
     readily understandable, and timely information to parents and 
     caretakers for use in making informed decisions in the 
     purchase of child restraints.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GORTON:
  S. 2071. A bill to benefit electricity consumers by promoting the 
reliability of the bulk-power system; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.


                     electric reliability 2000 act

 Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, today I introduce the Electric 
Reliability 2000 Act, a measure that deals with the somewhat mysterious 
world of the bulk electricity system. Although most Americans are not 
experts on the intricacies of interstate electric transmission grids, 
they need to have confidence that the system will work and their lights 
and heat will be there when they need them.
  This nation's interstate electric transmission system is an extremely 
complex network that connects with Canada and Mexico. It has developed 
over decades with various voluntary agreements that allow areas to work 
together depending on changing power needs that vary from day to day 
and hour to hour and sometimes minute to minute. These voluntary 
agreements were developed after a disastrous event in 1965 led to a 
blackout in New York City and throughout other parts of the Northeast.
  Yet a fundamental change has made this voluntary system unworkable 
for the future. With the expansion of competition in the wholesale 
electricity market--starting with the 1992 Energy Policy Act--the 
system of buying and selling wholesale power is now many times more 
complex than it was just a decade ago. With a stronger economy, 
electricity usage has increased while thousands of new electricity 
marketers and buyers have created new stresses on the system.
  These stresses to the system have affected many parts of the country. 
In August 1996, a sagging power line in Oregon made contact with a 
tree, and combined with other factors led to a power outage that 
affected over 7 million consumers along the West Coast. Other outages 
have occurred in different parts of the country since that time.
  To address this situation, more than a year ago a group of 
electricity industry officials began meeting to develop legislative 
language needed in this new era in electricity. They developed 
provisions that have been included as a small part of several bills, 
including the larger restructuring bills developed in the House and by 
the Clinton administration.
  Events in recent months have lent urgency to this issue. I believe it 
is time to separate the issue of electricity reliability from the 
larger issue of restructuring. Our continued economic growth is fueled 
by electricity, and we need to assure the public that the power will be 
there for their homes and their jobs when they count on it.
  The stresses in the system continue to mount. In the summer of 1999, 
Americans experienced a wide-range of severe electricity outages. The 
Department of Energy created a team of experts to investigate these 
outages, and it submitted its report last month. I quote from the 
report's summary:

       In anticipation of competitive markets, some utilities have 
     adopted a strategy of cost cutting that involves reduced 
     spending on reliability. In addition, responsibility for 
     reliability management has been disaggregated to multiple 
     institutions, with utilities, independent system operators, 
     independent power producers, customers, and markets all 
     playing a role. The overall effect has been that the 
     infrastructure for reliability assurance has been 
     considerably eroded.

  The report continues:

       Moreover, historical levels of electric reliability may not 
     be adequate for the future. The quality of electric power and 
     the assurance that it will always be available are 
     increasingly important in a society that is ever more 
     dependent on electricity.

  The report includes several findings that suggest a range of policy 
questions that need to be addressed in order to assure the reliability 
of the Nation's bulk power system.
  The bill I introduce today includes what has been termed the 
``consensus language'' that was developed over the past year by these 
experts who work on the reliability side of the electricity industry. 
This bill is not the complete solution to the reliability issue for 
this industry. It is a good starting point. It creates a process to 
develop enforceable rules for the bulk-power system, while giving 
various regions the ability to tailor these rules in ways that make 
sense for their individual systems and their specific geography.
  In addition to setting up rules and a referee to enforce these rules, 
``reliability'' also involves many other facets of the electricity 
industry that are not addressed in this bill: full and open access to 
transmission systems, effective conservation programs that can help 
reduce peak system demands, the ability to site electricity generation 
plants closer to the loads they serve, promoting small-scale 
distributed generation, such as fuel-cells, throughout the grid, and 
many other wide-ranging actions. Until we can gain a greater

[[Page 1105]]

consensus of the need to address these issues, this bill provides the 
opportunity to begin these discussions.
  Despite being described as a consensus bill, there may need to be 
changes to this legislative language so that it is effective. For 
example, there are ongoing discussions about the appropriate role for 
State regulators as their responsibilities relate to the interstate 
transmission system. Therefore I respectfully request Chairman 
Murkowski to conduct hearings on this serious issue of the reliability 
of the bulk power system and also to hold hearings on this bill as the 
starting point for solving this problem.
  Mr. President, I ask that a copy of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  The bill follows:

                                S. 2071

       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 ``Electric Reliability 2000 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. ELECTRIC RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION.

       (a) In General.--Part II of the Federal Power Act (16 
     U.S.C. 824 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 215. ELECTRIC RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Affiliated regional reliability entity.--The term 
     `affiliated regional reliability entity' means an entity 
     delegated authority under subsection (h).
       ``(2) Bulk-power system.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `bulk-power system' means all 
     facilities and control systems necessary for operating an 
     interconnected electric power transmission grid or any 
     portion of an interconnected transmission grid.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `bulk-power system' includes--
       ``(i) high voltage transmission lines, substations, control 
     centers, communications, data, and operations planning 
     facilities necessary for the operation of all or any part of 
     the interconnected transmission grid; and
       ``(ii) the output of generating units necessary to maintain 
     the reliability of the transmission grid.
       ``(3) Bulk-power system user.--The term `bulk-power system 
     user' means an entity that--
       ``(A) sells, purchases, or transmits electric energy over a 
     bulk-power system; or
       ``(B) owns, operates, or maintains facilities or control 
     systems that are part of a bulk-power system; or
       ``(C) is a system operator.
       ``(4) Electric reliability organization.--The term 
     `electric reliability organization' means the organization 
     designated by the Commission under subsection (d).
       ``(5) Entity rule.--The term `entity rule' means a rule 
     adopted by an affiliated regional reliability entity for a 
     specific region and designed to implement or enforce 1 or 
     more organization standards.
       ``(6) Independent director.--The term `independent 
     director' means a person that--
       ``(A) is not an officer or employee of an entity that would 
     reasonably be perceived as having a direct financial interest 
     in the outcome of a decision by the board of directors of the 
     electric reliability organization; and
       ``(B) does not have a relationship that would interfere 
     with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the 
     responsibilities of a director of the electric reliability 
     organization.
       ``(7) Industry sector.--The term `industry sector' means a 
     group of bulk-power system users with substantially similar 
     commercial interests, as determined by the board of directors 
     of the electric reliability organization.
       ``(8) Interconnection.--The term `interconnection' means a 
     geographic area in which the operation of bulk-power system 
     components is synchronized so that the failure of 1 or more 
     of the components may adversely affect the ability of the 
     operators of other components within the interconnection to 
     maintain safe and reliable operation of the facilities within 
     their control.
       ``(9) Organization standard.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `organization standard' means a 
     policy or standard adopted by the electric reliability 
     organization to provide for the reliable operation of a bulk-
     power system.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `organization standard' 
     includes--
       ``(i) an entity rule approved by the electric reliability 
     organization; and
       ``(ii) a variance approved by the electric reliability 
     organization.
       ``(10) Public interest group.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `public interest group' means a 
     nonprofit private or public organization that has an interest 
     in the activities of the electric reliability organization.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `public interest group' 
     includes--
       ``(i) a ratepayer advocate;
       ``(ii) an environmental group; and
       ``(iii) a State or local government organization that 
     regulates participants in, and promulgates government policy 
     with respect to, the market for electric energy.
       ``(11) System operator.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `system operator' means an 
     entity that operates or is responsible for the operation of a 
     bulk-power system.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `system operator' includes--
       ``(i) a control area operator;
       ``(ii) an independent system operator;
       ``(iii) a transmission company;
       ``(iv) a transmission system operator; and
       ``(v) a regional security coordinator.
       ``(12) Variance.--The term `variance' means an exception 
     from the requirements of an organization standard (including 
     a proposal for an organization standard in a case in which 
     there is no organization standard) that is adopted by an 
     affiliated regional reliability entity and is applicable to 
     all or a part of the region for which the affiliated regional 
     reliability entity is responsible.
       ``(b) Commission Authority.--
       ``(1) Jurisdiction.--Notwithstanding section 201(f), within 
     the United States, the Commission shall have jurisdiction 
     over the electric reliability organization, all affiliated 
     regional reliability entities, all system operators, and all 
     bulk-power system users, including entities described in 
     section 201(f), for purposes of approving organization 
     standards and enforcing compliance with this section.
       ``(2) Definition of terms.--The Commission may by 
     regulation define any term used in this section consistent 
     with the definitions in subsection (a) and the purpose and 
     intent of this Act.
       ``(c) Existing Reliability Standards.--
       ``(1) Submission to the commission.--Before designation of 
     an electric reliability organization under subsection (d), 
     any person, including the North American Electric Reliability 
     Council and its member Regional Reliability Councils, may 
     submit to the Commission any reliability standard, guidance, 
     practice, or amendment to a reliability standard, guidance, 
     or practice that the person proposes to be made mandatory and 
     enforceable.
       ``(2) Review by the commission.--The Commission, after 
     allowing interested persons an opportunity to submit 
     comments, may approve a proposed mandatory standard, 
     guidance, practice, or amendment submitted under paragraph 
     (1) if the Commission finds that the standard, guidance, or 
     practice is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, and in the public interest.
       ``(3) Effect of approval.--A standard, guidance, or 
     practice shall be mandatory and applicable according to its 
     terms following approval by the Commission and shall remain 
     in effect until it is--
       ``(A) withdrawn, disapproved, or superseded by an 
     organization standard that is issued or approved by the 
     electric reliability organization and made effective by the 
     Commission under section (e); or
       ``(B) disapproved by the Commission if, on complaint or 
     upon motion by the Commission and after notice and an 
     opportunity for comment, the Commission finds the standard, 
     guidance, or practice to be unjust, unreasonable, unduly 
     discriminatory or preferential, or not in the public 
     interest.
       ``(4) Enforceability.--A standard, guidance, or practice in 
     effect under this subsection shall be enforceable by the 
     Commission.
       ``(d) Designation of Electric Reliability Organization.--
       ``(1) Regulations.--
       ``(A) Proposed regulations.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of enactment of this section, the Commission shall 
     propose regulations specifying procedures and requirements 
     for an entity to apply for designation as the electric 
     reliability organization.
       ``(B) Notice and comment.--The Commission shall provide 
     notice and opportunity for comment on the proposed 
     regulations.
       ``(C) Final regulation.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Commission shall 
     promulgate final regulations under this subsection.
       ``(2) Application.--
       ``(A) Submission.--Following the promulgation of final 
     regulations under paragraph (1), an entity may submit an 
     application to the Commission for designation as the electric 
     reliability organization.
       ``(B) Contents.--The applicant shall describe in the 
     application--
       ``(i) the governance and procedures of the applicant; and
       ``(ii) the funding mechanism and initial funding 
     requirements of the applicant.
       ``(3) Notice and comment.--The Commission shall--
       ``(A) provide public notice of the application; and
       ``(B) afford interested parties an opportunity to comment.
       ``(4) Designation of electric reliability organization.--
     The Commission shall designate the applicant as the electric 
     reliability organization if the Commission determines that 
     the applicant--
       ``(A) has the ability to develop, implement, and enforce 
     standards that provide for an adequate level of reliability 
     of bulk-power systems;

[[Page 1106]]

       ``(B) permits voluntary membership to any bulk-power system 
     user or public interest group;
       ``(C) ensures fair representation of its members in the 
     selection of its directors and fair management of its 
     affairs, taking into account the need for efficiency and 
     effectiveness in decisionmaking and operations and the 
     requirements for technical competency in the development of 
     organization standards and the exercise of oversight of bulk-
     power system reliability;
       ``(D) ensures that no 2 industry sectors have the ability 
     to control, and no 1 industry sector has the ability to veto, 
     the applicant's discharge of its responsibilities as the 
     electric reliability organization (including actions by 
     committees recommending standards for approval by the board 
     or other board actions to implement and enforce standards);
       ``(E) provides for governance by a board wholly comprised 
     of independent directors;
       ``(F) provides a funding mechanism and requirements that--
       ``(i) are just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential and in the public interest; and
       ``(ii) satisfy the requirements of subsection (l);
       ``(G) has established procedures for development of 
     organization standards that--
       ``(i) provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public 
     comment, taking into account the need for efficiency and 
     effectiveness in decisionmaking and operations and the 
     requirements for technical competency in the development of 
     organization standards;
       ``(ii) ensure openness, a balancing of interests, and due 
     process; and
       ``(iii) includes alternative procedures to be followed in 
     emergencies;
       ``(H) has established fair and impartial procedures for 
     implementation and enforcement of organization standards, 
     either directly or through delegation to an affiliated 
     regional reliability entity, including the imposition of 
     penalties, limitations on activities, functions, or 
     operations, or other appropriate sanctions;
       ``(I) has established procedures for notice and opportunity 
     for public observation of all meetings, except that the 
     procedures for public observation may include alternative 
     procedures for emergencies or for the discussion of 
     information that the directors reasonably determine should 
     take place in closed session, such as litigation, personnel 
     actions, or commercially sensitive information;
       ``(J) provides for the consideration of recommendations of 
     States and State commissions; and
       ``(K) addresses other matters that the Commission considers 
     appropriate to ensure that the procedures, governance, and 
     funding of the electric reliability organization are just, 
     reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in 
     the public interest.
       ``(5) Exclusive designation.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Commission shall designate only 1 
     electric reliability organization.
       ``(B) Multiple applications.--If the Commission receives 2 
     or more timely applications that satisfy the requirements of 
     this subsection, the Commission shall approve only the 
     application that the Commission determines will best 
     implement this section.
       ``(e) Organization Standards.--
       ``(1) Submission of proposals to commission.--
       ``(A) In general.--The electric reliability organization 
     shall submit to the Commission proposals for any new or 
     modified organization standards.
       ``(B) Contents.--A proposal submitted under subparagraph 
     (A) shall include--
       ``(i) a concise statement of the purpose of the proposal; 
     and
       ``(ii) a record of any proceedings conducted with respect 
     to the proposal.
       ``(2) Review by the commission.--
       ``(A) Notice and comment.--The Commission shall--
       ``(i) provide notice of a proposal under paragraph (1); and
       ``(ii) allow interested persons 30 days to submit comments 
     on the proposal.
       ``(B) Action by the commission.--
       ``(i) In general.--After taking into consideration any 
     submitted comments, the Commission shall approve or 
     disapprove a proposed organization standard not later than 
     the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date of the 
     deadline for the submission of comments, except that the 
     Commission may extend the 60-day period for an additional 90 
     days for good cause.
       ``(ii) Failure to act.--If the Commission does not approve 
     or disapprove a proposal within the period specified in 
     clause (i), the proposed organization standard shall go into 
     effect subject to its terms, without prejudice to the 
     authority of the Commission to modify the organization 
     standard in accordance with the standards and requirements of 
     this section.
       ``(C) Effective date.--An organization standard approved by 
     the Commission shall take effect not earlier than 30 days 
     after the date of the Commission's order of approval.
       ``(D) Standards for approval.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Commission shall approve a proposed 
     new or modified organization standard if the Commission 
     determines the organization standard to be just, reasonable, 
     not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public 
     interest.
       ``(ii) Considerations.--In the exercise of its review 
     responsibilities under this subsection, the Commission--

       ``(I) shall give due weight to the technical expertise of 
     the electric reliability organization with respect to the 
     content of a new or modified organization standard; but
       ``(II) shall not defer to the electric reliability 
     organization with respect to the effect of the organization 
     standard on competition.

       ``(E) Remand.--A proposed organization standard that is 
     disapproved in whole or in part by the Commission shall be 
     remanded to the electric reliability organization for further 
     consideration.
       ``(3) Orders to develop or modify organization standards.--
     The Commission, on complaint or on motion of the Commission, 
     may order the electric reliability organization to develop 
     and submit to the Commission, by a date specified in the 
     order, an organization standard or modification to an 
     existing organization standard to address a specific matter 
     if the Commission considers a new or modified organization 
     standard appropriate to carry out this section, and the 
     electric reliability organization shall develop and submit 
     the organization standard or modification to the Commission 
     in accordance with this subsection.
       ``(4) Variances and entity rules.--
       ``(A) Proposal.--An affiliated regional reliability entity 
     may propose a variance or entity rule to the electric 
     reliability organization.
       ``(B) Expedited consideration.--If expedited consideration 
     is necessary to provide for bulk-power system reliability, 
     the affiliated regional reliability entity may--
       ``(i) request that the electric reliability organization 
     expedite consideration of the proposal; and
       ``(ii) file a notice of the request with the Commission.
       ``(C) Failure to act.--
       ``(i) In general.--If the electric reliability organization 
     fails to adopt the variance or entity rule, in whole or in 
     part, the affiliated regional reliability entity may request 
     that the Commission review the proposal.
       ``(ii) Action by the commission.--If the Commission 
     determines, after a review of the request, that the action of 
     the electric reliability organization did not conform to the 
     applicable standards and procedures approved by the 
     Commission, or if the Commission determines that the variance 
     or entity rule is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 
     or preferential, and in the public interest and that the 
     electric reliability organization has unreasonably rejected 
     or failed to act on the proposal, the Commission may--

       ``(I) remand the proposal for further consideration by the 
     electric reliability organization; or
       ``(II) order the electric reliability organization or the 
     affiliated regional reliability entity to develop a variance 
     or entity rule consistent with that requested by the 
     affiliated regional reliability entity.

       ``(D) Procedure.--A variance or entity rule proposed by an 
     affiliated regional reliability entity shall be submitted to 
     the electric reliability organization for review and 
     submission to the Commission in accordance with the 
     procedures specified in paragraph (2).
       ``(5) Immediate effectiveness.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, a new or modified organization standard 
     shall take effect immediately on submission to the Commission 
     without notice or comment if the electric reliability 
     organization--
       ``(i) determines that an emergency exists requiring that 
     the new or modified organization standard take effect 
     immediately without notice or comment;
       ``(ii) notifies the Commission as soon as practicable after 
     making the determination;
       ``(iii) submits the new or modified organization standard 
     to the Commission not later than 5 days after making the 
     determination; and
       ``(iv) includes in the submission an explanation of the 
     need for immediate effectiveness.
       ``(B) Notice and comment.--The Commission shall--
       ``(i) provide notice of the new or modified organization 
     standard or amendment for comment; and
       ``(ii) follow the procedures set out in paragraphs (2) and 
     (3) for review of the new or modified organization standard.
       ``(6) Compliance.--Each bulk power system user shall comply 
     with an organization standard that takes effect under this 
     section.
       ``(f) Coordination With Canada and Mexico.--
       ``(1) Recognition.--The electric reliability organization 
     shall take all appropriate steps to gain recognition in 
     Canada and Mexico.
       ``(2) International agreements.--
       ``(A) In general.--The President shall use best efforts to 
     enter into international agreements with the appropriate 
     governments of Canada and Mexico to provide for--
       ``(i) effective compliance with organization standards; and
       ``(ii) the effectiveness of the electric reliability 
     organization in carrying out its mission and 
     responsibilities.

[[Page 1107]]

       ``(B) Compliance.--All actions taken by the electric 
     reliability organization, an affiliated regional reliability 
     entity, and the Commission shall be consistent with any 
     international agreement under subparagraph (A).
       ``(g) Changes in Procedure, Governance, or Funding.--
       ``(1) Submission to the commission.--The electric 
     reliability organization shall submit to the Commission--
       ``(A) any proposed change in a procedure, governance, or 
     funding provision; or
       ``(B) any change in an affiliated regional reliability 
     entity's procedure, governance, or funding provision relating 
     to delegated functions.
       ``(2) Contents.--A submission under paragraph (1) shall 
     include an explanation of the basis and purpose for the 
     change.
       ``(3) Effectiveness.--
       ``(A) Changes in procedure.--
       ``(i) Changes constituting a statement of policy, practice, 
     or interpretation.--A proposed change in procedure shall take 
     effect 90 days after submission to the Commission if the 
     change constitutes a statement of policy, practice, or 
     interpretation with respect to the meaning or enforcement of 
     the procedure.
       ``(ii) Other changes.--A proposed change in procedure other 
     than a change described in clause (i) shall take effect on a 
     finding by the Commission, after notice and opportunity for 
     comment, that the change--

       ``(I) is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, and in the public interest; and
       ``(II) satisfies the requirements of subsection (d)(4).

       ``(B) Changes in governance or funding.--A proposed change 
     in governance or funding shall not take effect unless the 
     Commission finds that the change--
       ``(i) is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, and in the public interest; and
       ``(ii) satisfies the requirements of subsection (d)(4).
       ``(4) Order to amend.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Commission, on complaint or on the 
     motion of the Commission, may require the electric 
     reliability organization to amend a procedural, governance, 
     or funding provision if the Commission determines that the 
     amendment is necessary to meet the requirements of this 
     section.
       ``(B) Filing.--The electric reliability organization shall 
     submit the amendment in accordance with paragraph (1).
       ``(h) Delegations of Authority.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Implementation and enforcement of compliance.--At the 
     request of an entity, the electric reliability organization 
     shall enter into an agreement with the entity for the 
     delegation of authority to implement and enforce compliance 
     with organization standards in a specified geographic area if 
     the electric reliability organization finds that--
       ``(i) the entity satisfies the requirements of 
     subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), (D), (F), (J), and (K) of 
     subsection (d)(4); and
       ``(ii) the delegation would promote the effective and 
     efficient implementation and administration of bulk-power 
     system reliability.
       ``(B) Other authority.--The electric reliability 
     organization may enter into an agreement to delegate to an 
     entity any other authority, except that the electric 
     reliability organization shall reserve the right to set and 
     approve standards for bulk-power system reliability.
       ``(2) Approval by the commission.--
       ``(A) Submission to the commission.--The electric 
     reliability organization shall submit to the Commission--
       ``(i) any agreement entered into under this subsection; and
       ``(ii) any information the Commission requires with respect 
     to the affiliated regional reliability entity to which 
     authority is delegated.
       ``(B) Standards for approval.--The Commission shall approve 
     the agreement, following public notice and an opportunity for 
     comment, if the Commission finds that the agreement--
       ``(i) meets the requirements of paragraph (1); and
       ``(ii) is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, and in the public interest.
       ``(C) Rebuttable presumption.--A proposed delegation 
     agreement with an affiliated regional reliability entity 
     organized on an interconnection-wide basis shall be 
     rebuttably presumed by the Commission to promote the 
     effective and efficient implementation and administration of 
     the reliability of the bulk-power system.
       ``(D) Invalidity absent approval.--No delegation by the 
     electric reliability organization shall be valid unless the 
     delegation is approved by the Commission.
       ``(3) Procedures for entity rules and variances.--
       ``(A) In general.--A delegation agreement under this 
     subsection shall specify the procedures by which the 
     affiliated regional reliability entity may propose entity 
     rules or variances for review by the electric reliability 
     organization.
       ``(B) Interconnection-wide entity rules and variances.-- In 
     the case of a proposal for an entity rule or variance that 
     would apply on an interconnection-wide basis, the electric 
     reliability organization shall approve the entity rule or 
     variance unless the electric reliability organization makes a 
     written finding that the entity rule or variance--
       ``(i) was not developed in a fair and open process that 
     provided an opportunity for all interested parties to 
     participate;
       ``(ii) would have a significant adverse impact on 
     reliability or commerce in other interconnections;
       ``(iii) fails to provide a level of reliability of the 
     bulk-power system within the interconnection such that the 
     entity rule or variance would be likely to cause a serious 
     and substantial threat to public health, safety, welfare, or 
     national security; or
       ``(iv) would create a serious and substantial burden on 
     competitive markets within the interconnection that is not 
     necessary for reliability.
       ``(C) Noninterconnection-wide entity rules and variances.--
     In the case of a proposal for an entity rule or variance that 
     would apply only to part of an interconnection, the electric 
     reliability organization shall approve the entity rule or 
     variance if the affiliated regional reliability entity 
     demonstrates that the proposal--
       ``(i) was developed in a fair and open process that 
     provided an opportunity for all interested parties to 
     participate;
       ``(ii) would not have an adverse impact on commerce that is 
     not necessary for reliability;
       ``(iii) provides a level of bulk-power system reliability 
     that is adequate to protect public health, safety, welfare, 
     and national security and would not have a significant 
     adverse impact on reliability; and
       ``(iv) in the case of a variance, is based on a justifiable 
     difference between regions or subregions within the 
     affiliated regional reliability entity's geographic area.
       ``(D) Action by the electric reliability organization.--
       ``(i) In general.--The electric reliability organization 
     shall approve or disapprove a proposal under subparagraph (A) 
     within 120 days after the proposal is submitted.
       ``(ii) Failure to act.--If the electric reliability 
     organization fails to act within the time specified in clause 
     (i), the proposal shall be deemed to have been approved.
       ``(iii) Submission to the commission.--After approving a 
     proposal under subparagraph (A), the electric reliability 
     organization shall submit the proposal to the Commission for 
     approval under the procedures prescribed under subsection 
     (e).
       ``(E) Direct submissions.--An affiliated regional 
     reliability entity may not submit a proposal for approval 
     directly to the Commission except as provided in subsection 
     (e)(4).
       ``(4) Failure to reach delegation agreement.--
       ``(A) In general.--If an affiliated regional reliability 
     entity requests, consistent with paragraph (1), that the 
     electric reliability organization delegate authority to it, 
     but is unable within 180 days to reach agreement with the 
     electric reliability organization with respect to the 
     requested delegation, the entity may seek relief from the 
     Commission.
       ``(B) Review by the commission.--The Commission shall order 
     the electric reliability organization to enter into a 
     delegation agreement under terms specified by the Commission 
     if, after notice and opportunity for comment, the Commission 
     determines that--
       ``(i) a delegation to the affiliated regional reliability 
     entity would--

       ``(I) meet the requirements of paragraph (1); and
       ``(II) would be just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 
     or preferential, and in the public interest; and

       ``(ii) the electric reliability organization unreasonably 
     withheld the delegation.
       ``(5) Orders to modify delegation agreements.--
       ``(A) In general.--On complaint, or on motion of the 
     Commission, after notice to the appropriate affiliated 
     regional reliability entity, the Commission may order the 
     electric reliability organization to propose a modification 
     to a delegation agreement under this subsection if the 
     Commission determines that--
       ``(i) the affiliated regional reliability entity--

       ``(I) no longer has the capacity to carry out effectively 
     or efficiently the implementation or enforcement 
     responsibilities under the delegation agreement;
       ``(II) has failed to meet its obligations under the 
     delegation agreement; or
       ``(III) has violated this section;

       ``(ii) the rules, practices, or procedures of the 
     affiliated regional reliability entity no longer provide for 
     fair and impartial discharge of the implementation or 
     enforcement responsibilities under the delegation agreement;
       ``(iii) the geographic boundary of a transmission entity 
     approved by the Commission is not wholly within the boundary 
     of an affiliated regional reliability entity, and the 
     difference in boundaries is inconsistent with the effective 
     and efficient implementation and administration of bulk-power 
     system reliability; or

[[Page 1108]]

       ``(iv) the agreement is inconsistent with a delegation 
     ordered by the Commission under paragraph (4).
       ``(B) Suspension.--
       ``(i) In general.--Following an order to modify a 
     delegation agreement under subparagraph (A), the Commission 
     may suspend the delegation agreement if the electric 
     reliability organization or the affiliated regional 
     reliability entity does not propose an appropriate and timely 
     modification.
       ``(ii) Assumption of responsibilities.--If a delegation 
     agreement is suspended, the electric reliability organization 
     shall assume the responsibilities delegated under the 
     delegation agreement.
       ``(i) Organization Membership.--Each system operator shall 
     be a member of--
       ``(1) the electric reliability organization; and
       ``(2) any affiliated regional reliability entity operating 
     under an agreement effective under subsection (h) applicable 
     to the region in which the system operator operates, or is 
     responsible for the operation of, a transmission facility.
       ``(j) Enforcement.--
       ``(1) Disciplinary actions.--
       ``(A) In general.--Consistent with procedures approved by 
     the Commission under subsection (d)(4)(H), the electric 
     reliability organization may impose a penalty, limitation on 
     activities, functions, or operations, or other disciplinary 
     action that the electric reliability organization finds 
     appropriate against a bulk-power system user if the electric 
     reliability organization, after notice and an opportunity for 
     interested parties to be heard, issues a finding in writing 
     that the bulk-power system user has violated an organization 
     standard.
       ``(B) Notification.--The electric reliability organization 
     shall immediately notify the Commission of any disciplinary 
     action imposed with respect to an act or failure to act of a 
     bulk-power system user that affected or threatened to affect 
     bulk-power system facilities located in the United States.
       ``(C) Right to petition.--A bulk-power system user that is 
     the subject of disciplinary action under paragraph (1) shall 
     have the right to petition the Commission for a modification 
     or rescission of the disciplinary action.
       ``(D) Injunctions.--If the electric reliability 
     organization finds it necessary to prevent a serious threat 
     to reliability, the electric reliability organization may 
     seek injunctive relief in the United States district court 
     for the district in which the affected facilities are 
     located.
       ``(E) Effective date.--
       ``(i) In general.--Unless the Commission, on motion of the 
     Commission or on application by the bulk-power system user 
     that is the subject of the disciplinary action, suspends the 
     effectiveness of a disciplinary action, the disciplinary 
     action shall take effect on the 30th day after the date on 
     which--

       ``(I) the electric reliability organization submits to the 
     Commission--

       ``(aa) a written finding that the bulk-power system user 
     violated an organization standard; and
       ``(bb) the record of proceedings before the electric 
     reliability organization; and

       ``(II) the Commission posts the written finding on the 
     Internet.

       ``(ii) Duration.--A disciplinary action shall remain in 
     effect or remain suspended unless the Commission, after 
     notice and opportunity for hearing, affirms, sets aside, 
     modifies, or reinstates the disciplinary action.
       ``(iii) Expedited consideration.--The Commission shall 
     conduct the hearing under procedures established to ensure 
     expedited consideration of the action taken.
       ``(2) Compliance orders.-- The Commission, on complaint by 
     any person or on motion of the Commission, may order 
     compliance with an organization standard and may impose a 
     penalty, limitation on activities, functions, or operations, 
     or take such other disciplinary action as the Commission 
     finds appropriate, against a bulk-power system user with 
     respect to actions affecting or threatening to affect bulk-
     power system facilities located in the United States if the 
     Commission finds, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, 
     that the bulk-power system user has violated or threatens to 
     violate an organization standard.
       ``(3) Other actions.--The Commission may take such action 
     as is necessary against the electric reliability organization 
     or an affiliated regional reliability entity to ensure 
     compliance with an organization standard, or any Commission 
     order affecting electric reliability organization or 
     affiliated regional reliability entity.
       ``(k) Reliability Reports.--The electric reliability 
     organization shall--
       ``(1) conduct periodic assessments of the reliability and 
     adequacy of the interconnected bulk-power system in North 
     America; and
       ``(2) report annually to the Secretary of Energy and the 
     Commission its findings and recommendations for monitoring or 
     improving system reliability and adequacy.
       ``(l) Assessment and Recovery of Certain Costs.--
       ``(1) In general.--The reasonable costs of the electric 
     reliability organization, and the reasonable costs of each 
     affiliated regional reliability entity that are related to 
     implementation or enforcement of organization standards or 
     other requirements contained in a delegation agreement 
     approved under subsection (h), shall be assessed by the 
     electric reliability organization and each affiliated 
     regional reliability entity, respectively, taking into 
     account the relationship of costs to each region and based on 
     an allocation that reflects an equitable sharing of the costs 
     among all electric energy consumers.
       ``(2) Rules.--The Commission shall provide by rule for the 
     review of costs and allocations under paragraph (1) in 
     accordance with the standards in this subsection and 
     subsection (d)(4)(F).
       ``(m) Application of Antitrust Laws.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the following activities are rebuttably presumed to be 
     in compliance with the antitrust laws of the United States:
       ``(A) Activities undertaken by the electric reliability 
     organization under this section or affiliated regional 
     reliability entity operating under a delegation agreement 
     under subsection (h).
       ``(B) Activities of a member of the electric reliability 
     organization or affiliated regional reliability entity in 
     pursuit of the objectives of the electric reliability 
     organization or affiliated regional reliability entity under 
     this section undertaken in good faith under the rules of the 
     organization of the electric reliability organization or 
     affiliated regional reliability entity.
       ``(2) Availability of defenses.--In a civil action brought 
     by any person or entity against the electric reliability 
     organization or an affiliated regional reliability entity 
     alleging a violation of an antitrust law based on an activity 
     under this Act, the defenses of primary jurisdiction and 
     immunity from suit and other affirmative defenses shall be 
     available to the extent applicable.
       ``(n) Regional Advisory Role.--
       ``(1) Establishment of regional advisory body.--The 
     Commission shall establish a regional advisory body on the 
     petition of the Governors of at least two-thirds of the 
     States within a region that have more than one-half of their 
     electrical loads served within the region.
       ``(2) Membership.--A regional advisory body--
       ``(A) shall be composed of 1 member from each State in the 
     region, appointed by the Governor of the State; and
       ``(B) may include representatives of agencies, States, and 
     Provinces outside the United States, on execution of an 
     appropriate international agreement described in subsection 
     (f).
       ``(3) Functions.--A regional advisory body may provide 
     advice to the electric reliability organization, an 
     affiliated regional reliability entity, or the Commission 
     regarding--
       ``(A) the governance of an affiliated regional reliability 
     entity existing or proposed within a region;
       ``(B) whether a standard proposed to apply within the 
     region is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, and in the public interest; and
       ``(C) whether fees proposed to be assessed within the 
     region are--
       ``(i) just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
     preferential, and in the public interest; and
       ``(ii) consistent with the requirements of subsection (l).
       ``(4) Deference.--In a case in which a regional advisory 
     body encompasses an entire interconnection, the Commission 
     may give deference to advice provided by the regional 
     advisory body under paragraph (3).
       ``(o) Applicability of Section.--This section does not 
     apply outside the 48 contiguous States.
       ``(p) Rehearings; Court Review of Orders.--Section 313 
     applies to an order of the Commission issued under this 
     section.''.
       (b) Enforcement.--
       (1) General penalties.--Section 316(c) of the Federal Power 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 825o(c)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``subsection'' and inserting ``section''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``or 214'' and inserting ``214 or 215''.
       (2) Certain provisions.--Section 316A of the Federal Power 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 825o-1) is amended by striking ``or 214'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``214, or 215''.
       (c) Savings Clause.--[RESERVED]
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. 
        Jeffords):
  S. 2072. A bill to require the Secretary of Energy to report to 
Congress on the readiness of the heating oil and propane industries; to 
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


                     the home heating readiness act

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Home Heating 
Readiness Act, which I offer with Senators Lautenberg, Lieberman, and 
Jeffords. The goal of this legislation is to prevent sharp and 
sustained increases in the price of home heating fuel, like the kind of 
price spike we are experiencing right now in Massachusetts and other 
northeastern states.

[[Page 1109]]

  Mr. President, at the end of December, the price of a gallon of home 
heating oil in Massachusetts average $1.78 across the state, and in 
some local areas consumers are complaining of prices as high as $2.00 
per gallon. Only several weeks ago, when the weather was warmer, the 
price was far lower, about $.98, but as soon as the weather turned 
cold--as soon as families needed more oil to heat their homes--the 
price spiked. I want to be clear, on average, it appears that this 
winter will be warmer than most. Our problem is not the weather alone, 
something else in the supply chain of heating oil has failed. The Home 
Heating Readiness Act is an effort to learn, before it's too late, the 
steps we can take to correct deficiencies and prevent price spikes.
  Already the Energy Information Administration examines the price of 
heating fuel each fall in a report called the Winter Fuels Outlook, and 
the Administration has done, overall, an excellent job of examining 
supply, demand and potential weather scenarios and estimating the price 
of heating oil and propane. This legislation would ask the 
Administration to go farther and examine the functional capability of 
the industries, to search out potential problems and help us prevent or 
mitigate them. It asks EIA to examine the global and regional crude oil 
and refined product supplies; the adequacy and utilization of refinery 
capability; the adequacy, utilization, and distribution of regional 
refined product storage capacity; weather conditions; refined product 
transportation system; market inefficiencies; and any other factor 
affecting the functional capability of the industry to provide 
affordable home heating oil and propane. In addition to identifying 
problems, EIA will make recommendations on how those problems can be 
corrected, and how price spikes can be avoided or at least mitigated.
  Mr. President, with this legislation we are asking the EIA to do more 
and we should appropriate more funding to get the job done. For now, 
this legislation does not authorize a specific amount. It is my hope 
that the Clinton administration will work with us to determine an 
appropriate authorization level that we can add into this bill at an 
appropriate time. To help alleviate our current fuel crises the Clinton 
administration has released roughly $175 million to help low income 
families. I want to applaud that decision--those resources are urgently 
needed. However, I want to also point out that if we prevent these 
price spikes with better evaluation of the industry, we may have to 
spend less of those emergency funds in future winters. Finally, I want 
to work with Energy and Natural Resources Committee to get its input on 
how this proposal can be improved to meet our goals.
  The old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure 
certainly holds true in this case, and I hope that we act to create the 
Home Heating Readiness Report.
  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. 2072

       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 ``Home Heating Readiness 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) in the United States, more than 10,000,000 households 
     burn heating oil and more than 5,000,000 burn propane to 
     generate space heat;
       (2) sharp and sustained increases in the price of heating 
     oil and propane disproportionately harm poor and elderly 
     people with low and fixed incomes, who may be forced to 
     choose between heat and food, medicine, and other basic 
     necessities;
       (3) sharp and sustained increases in the price of heating 
     oil and propane can negatively affect the national economy 
     and regional economies, and such increases have occurred in 
     the winters of 1983-84, 1988-89, 1996-97, and 1999-2000;
       (4) sharp and sustained increases in the price of heating 
     oil and propane can be caused by--
       (A) deficiencies in global or regional crude oil or refined 
     product supplies;
       (B) inadequacy or underutilization of refinery capacity;
       (C) inadequacy, underutilization, or disadvantageous 
     distribution of regional refined product storage capacity;
       (D) adverse weather conditions;
       (E) impediments to efficient and timely transportation of 
     refined product;
       (F) market inefficiencies; and
       (G) other factors affecting the functional capability of 
     the energy industry;
       (5) the Energy Information Administration is charged with 
     analyzing the United States energy industry and markets and 
     providing projections on the retail price of energy products, 
     including heating oil and propane;
       (6) future sharp and sustained increases in the national 
     and regional price of heating oil and propane can be avoided 
     or at least mitigated if--
       (A) the Energy Information Administration identifies 
     potential failures in the functional capability of the energy 
     industry to provide affordable heating oil and propane to 
     consumers in all regions of the United States; and
       (B) those potential failures are remedied; and
       (7) avoiding sharp and sustained increases in the national 
     and regional price of heating oil and propane can reduce 
     Federal, State, and local expenditures to assist low-income 
     and other households in need of financial assistance when 
     prices increase.

     SEC. 3. ANNUAL HOME HEATING READINESS REPORTS.

       (a) In General.--Part A of title I of the Energy Policy and 
     Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6211 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 108. ANNUAL HOME HEATING READINESS REPORTS.

       ``(a) In General.--On or before September 1 of each year, 
     Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Energy 
     Information Agency, shall submit to Congress a Home Heating 
     Readiness Report on the readiness of the heating oil and 
     propane industries to supply fuel under various weather 
     conditions, including rapid decreases in temperature.
       ``(b) Contents.--The Home Heating Readiness Report shall 
     include--
       ``(1) estimates of the consumption, expenditures, and 
     average price per gallon of heating oil and propane for the 
     upcoming period of October through March for various weather 
     conditions, with special attention to extreme weather, and 
     various regions of the country;
       ``(2) an evaluation of--
       ``(A) global and regional crude oil and refined product 
     supplies;
       ``(B) the adequacy and utilization of refinery capacity;
       ``(C) the adequacy, utilization, and distribution of 
     regional refined product storage capacity;
       ``(D) weather conditions;
       ``(E) the refined product transportation system;
       ``(F) market inefficiencies; and
       ``(G) any other factor affecting the functional capability 
     of the heating oil industry and propane industry that has the 
     potential to affect national or regional supplies and prices;
       ``(3) recommendations on steps that the Federal, State, and 
     local governments can take to prevent or alleviate the impact 
     of sharp and sustained increases in the price of heating oil 
     and propane; and
       ``(4) recommendations on steps that companies engaged in 
     the production, refining, storage, transportation of heating 
     oil or propane, or any other activity related to the heating 
     oil industry or propane industry, can take to prevent or 
     alleviate the impact of sharp and sustained increases in the 
     price of heating oil and propane.
       ``(c) Information Requests.--The Secretary may request 
     information necessary to prepare the Home Heating Readiness 
     Report from companies described in subsection (b)(4).''.
       (b) Conforming and Technical Amendments.--The Energy Policy 
     and Conservation Act is amended--
       (1) in the table of contents in the first section (42 
     U.S.C. prec. 6201), by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 106 the following:

``Sec. 107. Major fuel burning stationary source.
``Sec. 108. Annual home heating readiness reports.''; and
       (2) in section 107 (42 U.S.C. 6215), by striking ``Sec. 
     107. (a) No Governor'' and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 107. MAJOR FUEL BURNING STATIONARY SOURCE.

       ``(a) No Governor''.

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise to speak about an extremely 
serious problem plaguing the citizens of my state of Connecticut and 
those throughout the Northeast--the skyrocketing cost of home heating 
oil and the fear of higher gas prices that will follow.
  This complaint may sound familiar to some of my colleagues, 
particularly those similarly-situated in cold-weather states. Senator 
Dodd and I and several others have repeatedly voiced concerns about the 
volatility of the heating oil-gasoline marketplace over the

[[Page 1110]]

last several years, about the sudden swings in prices we have 
experienced as a result of that volatility, and the threat it poses to 
the livelihood of our constituents and the stability of our regional 
economy. The situation now, though, is more dire than anything we have 
seen in recent years. While I do not want to be an alarmist, I think it 
is critical for my colleagues to understand the severity of the squeeze 
many families and businesses are feeling and the potential for economic 
havoc.
  We are bordering on a real crisis. The average price of a gallon of 
heating oil in the Northeast has jumped more than 100 percent since 
mid-January. Many families are really struggling to pay their bills and 
keep their families warm. Dealers and distributors are reporting 
significant shortages throughout the region, which promises to send 
prices spiraling even higher in the near term. And if this vicious 
cycle of high demand and low supply continues to turn, and if the 
weather stays the way it has, many households may literally be left out 
in the cold, and their well-being put at risk.
  It is not just consumers, though, who are being hit hard by this 
price spike. It is also hurting a number of small businesses that are 
not prepared to absorb this kind of sudden surge in costs. It sure is 
hurting many small companies in the heating oil industry, the 
independent distributors and retailers, who form the backbone of this 
market. I have already heard of one oil dealer in Connecticut who owns 
a family business and who needed to take out a second mortgage on his 
home to make it through this hardship. It may not be long before others 
join him. There is also the very real risk of some small dealers being 
forced out of business.
  As a result of all this, a conspicuous current of fear and 
uncertainty is rippling throughout the Northeast. People are anxious 
for some answers just as they are desperate for some relief. Like many 
of my colleagues, my offices have been inundated with calls from around 
the state from outraged homeowners demanding to know why their heating 
bills are going through the roof and what we are doing to bring them 
down.
  We know that supplies are low and demand is high, and that is the 
basic source of the problem. But it goes much deeper than that. The 
decision made by OPEC to limit the production and supply of crude oil 
on the international market has been a major factor. Our domestic 
supply has shrunk considerably. Another factor has been the 
temperature; the cold weather and strong winds have not only kept 
demand high, they have frozen rivers and made it difficult at times for 
oil barges to dock and unload their product. And some questions have to 
be raised about the choices made by the major oil companies, while the 
supply of crude oil may have been sufficient to meet demand, the 
refiners may have made matters worse by focusing on turning out more 
gasoline than heating oil in anticipation of a warmer winter. These 
questions deserve more attention, and I intend to press for more 
information about how these decisions are being made about utilization 
of capacity, which are critical to determining oil supplies and by 
extension oil prices.
  But the complexity of this problem does not mean we are powerless to 
help. Along with Senator Dodd and the rest of our state delegation, we 
have been doing all we can to provide some immediate relief from these 
spiraling prices and troubling shortages. One of our principal concerns 
is for the low-income families who are being asked to choose between 
putting food on the table and heating their homes. The price spike is 
hitting these families the hardest, and we are doing our best to help 
them make it through. A bipartisan coalition sent a letter to the 
President two weeks ago urging him to quickly release emergency funds 
from the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which is a critical 
first line of defense for our neighbors who are least able to cope with 
sudden price surges. The President thankfully responded by releasing 
$45 million for the disadvantaged families of New England, including 
$3.1 million for those in Connecticut. This was a significant gesture, 
but there are many families who won't benefit from it. That is why just 
two days ago our coalition sent the President another letter requesting 
that an additional $200 million in LIHEAP funding be released 
immediately. I hope the President again hears our concerns and heeds 
our call.
  I am also concerned about the independent oil suppliers in the 
Northeast. Most home heating oil distributors are small businesses with 
few employees; these businesses are not always in the position to 
weather severe price fluctuations or shortages as we are seeing now. 
Part of the problem is that small oil dealers often must pay the high 
price of crude oil from large wholesalers before they are able to 
collect on oil sales to residential homes. This leaves them with few 
reserves to make due. To help relieve the burden on these businesses, I 
have asked the Small Business Administration to make available a 
package of short turnaround loans and technical assistance. The SBA has 
been highly sensitive to this problem, and they are moving quickly to 
spread the word around the region about these options.
  Along with several of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I 
have supported and continue to support a drawdown of the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve as a way to quickly boost stocks in the Northeast and 
thereby quickly reduce prices. Senator Dodd and I and several of our 
colleagues from neighboring states have lobbied hard for the 
Administration to take that step. We have cosponsored legislation that 
explicitly authorizes the Secretary of Energy to tap the SPR in these 
circumstances. We wrote the President two weeks ago urging him to 
approve a drawdown as soon as possible. And shortly thereafter we met 
with Energy Secretary Bill Richardson to plead this case directly. The 
Secretary unfortunately has been reluctant to pursue this option, but 
we have not given up hope of changing his mind, and will continue to 
push our argument.
  While we believe the SPR drawdown is critical to getting us through 
this short-term emergency, it is not a long-term solution. It will not 
and cannot defuse the volatility of the heating oil marketplace. But 
there are a number of steps we can take to prevent these disruptive 
price spikes from cycling in and out. First, it is important that we 
convince leaders of the oil-producing nations that colluding to hold 
down supply is not in their long-term interest. As we have seen, prices 
of oil have indeed gone up, but there is growing resentment of the 
policies of OPEC as our citizens feel a strengthening pinch. It is 
important that these countries understand that if they continue with 
this strategy, they may jeopardize good relations with the United 
States. Secretary Richardson will soon be meeting with OPEC's leaders, 
and we are pressing him to forcefully communicate this message to our 
allies and trading partners.
  Second, we should take a hard look at the use of interruptible gas 
contracts by natural gas suppliers and the evidence that these 
contracts may be exacerbating the volatility of the heating oil market. 
These ``interruptible" contracts can be obtained at a discount rate in 
exchange for giving the contractor the ability to suspend service when 
gas supply is low or demand is high. When these contracts are 
interrupted, many customers typically turn to heating oil as their 
preferred alternative, creating a sudden, secondary demand jolt to the 
oil market. I have heard from a number of leaders in the heating oil 
industry who fear that this is exactly what is happening now. We need 
to better understand the level of additional heating oil demand caused 
by these types of contracts and be able to anticipate demand 
fluctuations as accurately as possible so that we may avoid future 
situations where demand exceeds supply. For that reason, I recently 
asked Secretary Richardson to investigate the extent and impact of 
interruptible contracts, and to report back to us on his findings to 
determine what if anything we should do about this practice.
  Our current situation points to the fundamental problem that we are 
far too dependent upon foreign oil for our energy needs. We need to 
employ long-

[[Page 1111]]

term strategies to decrease our reliance upon foreign nations and 
bolster our own energy capacity. Many of us have cosponsored 
legislation in the past to increase research and development funding 
for renewable energy sources. We need to invest time, money, and an 
increased level of effort in the development of energy efficient power 
sources such as wind, solar, and natural gas. I will continue to work 
toward this goal and I strongly urge my colleagues to do so as well.
  Mr. President, as I said, I rise to speak about a very serious 
problem plaguing the citizens of Connecticut and the Northeast; that 
is, the skyrocketing cost of home heating oil and the fear of higher 
gas prices that will come with the warmer weather. There is a very 
complicated situation as to why it exists.
  It begins with the decision by the OPEC cartel to reduce the supply 
of oil. It goes to the decision of some oil companies not to refine 
adequate supplies of home heating oil. Whatever the complexity, it does 
not mean that we are powerless to help.
  Senator Dodd and I, and the rest of our delegation, on earlier 
occasions, with colleagues from throughout the Northeast from both 
parties, have appealed to the President to release Low Income Home 
Energy Assistance Program funding. He did that--$45 million worth.
  We have another request in now for an additional $200 million. It is 
that bad in our State.
  The real answer to this is to open up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 
and effect the laws of supply and demand, 560 million barrels of oil 
that we, the taxpayers, U.S. Government own. This is the time to use 
it.
  Up until now, Secretary Richardson and the administration have 
refused to do so. I appeal to them today on behalf of the people of 
Connecticut who are suffering under the shock of doubling and in some 
cases tripling of what they pay for home heating oil. Please open up 
the reserve. There is now a new idea of swaps, not selling the oil but 
allowing the oil companies to take it out of reserve, bring it into the 
market, increase supply, lower price, and then put oil back into the 
reserve, even a higher amount.
  The short of it is, we are in crisis in the Northeast. It is a crisis 
that, if it is not stopped and is allowed to go on, with higher 
gasoline prices that will affect the rest of the country in spring 
time, it will begin to create the kind of inflation that will cut the 
economic growth we have enjoyed.

                          ____________________