[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2884-2897]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. WELLSTONE:
  S. 460. A bill to provide for fairness and accuracy in high stakes 
educational decisions for students; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill I 
introduced last year that addresses high stakes testing: the practice 
of using a test as the sole determinant of whether a student will be 
graduated, promoted or placed in different ability groupings. I am 
increasingly concerned that high stakes tests are being grossly abused 
in the name of greater accountability,

[[Page 2885]]

and almost always to the serious detriment of our children.
  Testing is necessary and beneficial. We should require it. But, 
allowing the continued misuse of high-stakes tests is, in itself, a 
gross failure of imagination, a failure both of educators and of 
policymakers, who persistently refuse to provide the educational 
resources necessary to guarantee an equally rich educational experience 
for all our children. That all citizens will be given an equal start 
through a sound education is one of the most basic, promised rights of 
our democracy. Our chronic refusal as a nation to guarantee that right 
for all children, including poor children, is a national disgrace.
  This legislation would stem the growing trend of misusing high stakes 
tests. The legislation would require that states and districts use 
multiple indicators of student achievement in addition to standardized 
tests if they are going to use tests as part of a high stakes decision. 
The legislation would also require that if tests are used, they must be 
valid and reliable for the purposes for which they are used; must 
measure what the student was taught; and must provide appropriate 
accommodations for students with limited English proficiency and 
disabilities.
  It is important to note that the American Psychological Association, 
the group entrusted with developing the standards for educational 
testing, has endorsed this legislation. Like many Americans who care 
deeply that our students are assessed appropriately, they feel that it 
is crucial for us to stem a tide that it becoming increasingly 
problematic.
  I would like to explain exactly why this bill would be so important 
and why I seek your support for it. I am struck by National Education 
Association President Bob Chase's comparison of this trend toward high 
stakes testing to the movie, ``Field of Dreams.'' In my view, it is as 
though people are saying, ``If we test them, they will perform.'' In 
too many places, testing, which is a critical part of systemic 
educational accountability, has ceased its purpose of measuring 
educational and school improvement and has become synonymous with it.
  Making students accountable for test scores works well on a bumper 
sticker, and it allows many politicians to look good by saying that 
they will not tolerate failure. But it represents a hollow promise. Far 
from improving education, high stakes testing marks a major retreat 
from fairness, from accuracy, from quality and from equity.
  When used correctly, standardized tests are critical for diagnosing 
inequality and for identifying where we need improvement. They enable 
us to measure achievement across groups of students so that we can help 
ensure that states and districts are held accountable for improving the 
achievement of all students regardless of race, income, gender, limited 
English proficiency or disability. Tests are a critical tool, but they 
are not a panacea.
  The abuse of tests for high stakes purposes has subverted the 
benefits tests can bring. Using a single standardized test as the sole 
determinant for promotion, tracking, ability grouping and graduation is 
not fair and has not fostered greater equality or opportunity for 
students. First, standardized tests can not sufficiently validly or 
reliably assess what students know to make high stakes decisions about 
them.
  The 1999 National Research Council report, ``High Stakes,'' concludes 
that ``no single test score can be considered a definitive measure of a 
student's knowledge,'' and that ``an educational decision that will 
have a major impact on a test taker should not be made solely or 
automatically on the basis of a single test score.''
  The ``Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing,'' 1999 
Edition, which has served as the standard for test developers and users 
for decades, asserts that: ``In educational settings, a decision or a 
characterization that will have a major impact on a student should not 
be made on the basis of a single test score.''
  Even test publishers, including Harcourt Brace, CTB McGraw Hill, 
Riverside and ETS, consistently warn against this practice. For 
example, Riverside Publishing asserts in the ``Interpretive Guide for 
School Administrators'' for the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, ``Many of 
the common misuses, of standardized tests, stem from depending on a 
single test score to make a decision about a student or class of 
students.''
  CTB McGraw Hill writes that ``A variety of tests, or multiple 
measures, is necessary to tell educators what students know and can do 
. . . the multiple measures approach to assessment is the keystone to 
valid, reliable, fair information about student achievement.''
  There are many reasons tests cannot be relied upon as the sole 
determinant in making high stakes decisions about students. The 
National Research Council describes how these tests can be unreliable. 
The Council concludes that ``a student's test score can be expected to 
vary across different versions of a test, . . . as a function of the 
particular sample questions asked and/or transitory factors, such as 
the student's health on the day of the test. Thus, no single test score 
can be considered a definitive measure of a student's knowledge.''
  The research of David Rogosa at Stanford University shows how test 
scores are not valid, in isolation, to make judgements about individual 
achievement. His study of California's Stanford 9 National Percentile 
Rank Scores for individual students showed that the chances that a 
student whose true score is in the 50th percentile will receive a 
reported score that is within 5 percentage points of his true score are 
only 30 percent in reading and 42 percent on ninth grade math tests.
  Rogosa also showed that on the Stanford 9 test ``the chances, . . . 
that two students with identical ``real achievement'' will score more 
than 10 percentile points apart on the same test'' is 57 percent for 
9th graders and 42 percent on the fourth grade reading test. This 
margin of error shows why it would not be fair to use a cut-score in 
making a high stakes decision about a child.
  Robert Rayborn, who directs Harcourt's Stanford 9 program in 
California reenforced these findings when asked about the Stanford 9. 
He said, ``They should never make high-stakes individual decisions with 
a single measure of any kind,'' including the Stanford 9.
  Politicians and policy makers who continue to push for high stakes 
tests and educators who continue to use them in the face of this 
knowledge have closed their eyes to clearly set professional and 
scientific standards. They demand responsibility and high standards of 
students and schools while they let themselves get away with defying 
the most basic standards of the education profession.
  It would be irresponsible if a parent or a teacher used a 
manufactured product on children in a way that the manufacturer says is 
unsafe. Why do we then honor and declare ``accountable'' policy makers 
and politicians who use tests on children in a way that the test 
manufacturers have said is effectively unsafe?
  Many of my colleagues will remember how 8,600 students in New York 
City were mistakenly held in summer school because their tests were 
graded incorrectly or how 54 students in Minnesota were denied their 
diplomas because of a test scoring error.
  When we talk about responsibility, what could be more irresponsible 
than using an invalid or unreliable measure as the sole determinant of 
something so important as high school graduation or in-school 
promotion?
  It has been clearly established through research that high stakes 
tests for individual students, when used in isolation, are fatally 
flawed. I would, however, also like to address a general issue that 
this bill does not address directly, but that I think is really what 
all of this is about in the end. The trend towards high stakes testing 
represents a harsh agenda that holds children responsible for our own 
failure to invest in their future and in their achievement. I firmly 
believe that it is grossly unfair, for example, to hold back a student 
based on a standardized test if that student has not had the

[[Page 2886]]

tools required to learn the material covered on the test. When we 
impose high stakes tests on an educational system where there are, as 
Jonathan Kozol says, ``savage inequalities,'' and then we do nothing to 
address the underlying causes of those inequalities, we set up children 
to fail.
  People talk about using tests to motivate students to do well and 
using tests to ensure that we close the achievement gap. This kind of 
talk is unfair because it tells only part of the story. We cannot close 
the achievement gap until we close the gap in investment between poor 
and rich schools no matter how ``motivated'' some students are. We know 
what these key investments are: quality teaching, parental involvement, 
and early childhood education, to name just a few.
  But instead of doing what we know will work, and instead of taking 
responsibility as policy makers to invest in improving students' lives, 
we place the responsibility squarely on children. It is simply 
negligent to force children to pass a test and expect that the poorest 
children, who face every disadvantage, will be able to do as well as 
those who have every advantage.
  When we do this, we hold children responsible for our own inaction 
and unwillingness to live up to our own promises and our own 
obligations. We confuse their failure with our own. This is a harsh 
agenda indeed, for America's children.
  All of us in politics like to get our picture taken with children. We 
never miss a ``photo op.'' We all like to say that ``children are our 
future.'' We are all for children until it comes time to make the 
investment. Too often, despite the talk, when it comes to making the 
investment in the lives of our children, we come up a dollar short.
  Noted civil rights activist Fannie Lou Hamer used to say, ``I'm sick 
and tired of being sick and tired.'' Well I'm sick and tired of 
symbolic politics. When we say we are for children, we ought to be 
committed to invest in the health, skills and intellect of our 
children. We are not going to achieve our goals on a tin cup budget. 
Unless we make a real commitment and fully fund key programs like Head 
Start, Title I and IDEA, and unless we put our money where our mouth 
is, children will continue to fail.
  We must never stop demanding that children do their best. We must 
never stop holding schools accountable. Measures of student performance 
can include standardized tests, but only when coupled with other 
measures of achievement, more substantive education reforms and a much 
fuller, sustained investment in schools.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRIST:
  S. 461. A bill to support educational partnerships, focusing on 
mathematics, science, and technology, between institutions of higher 
education and elementary schools and secondary schools, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Math and 
Science Education Partnership Act. This bill will encourage States, 
institutions of higher education, elementary schools and secondary 
schools to work together to improve the math and science teaching as a 
profession.
  The purpose of this act is many fold. Through partnering schools with 
higher education institutions, the bill proposes to encourage 
institutions of higher education to assume greater responsibility for 
improving math and science teacher education through the establishment 
of a comprehensive, integrated system of recruiting and advising such 
teachers. Such partnerships will bring together math and science 
teachers in elementary schools and secondary schools with scientists, 
mathematicians, and engineers to increase teacher content knowledge and 
improve teaching skills through the use of more sophisticated 
laboratory space and equipment, computing facilities, libraries and 
other resources that colleges and universities are more able to 
provide.
  The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Education to 
award competitive grants to eligible partnerships for a period of 5 
years. The partnerships will include a state, a math or science 
department of an institution of higher education, and a local school 
district. A priority will be given to those districts with a high 
poverty rate and a high number of teachers teaching out of their 
subject area.
  A partnership may use the grant funds to develop more rigorous 
mathematics and science curricula based on standards, to recruit math 
and science majors to teaching through bonuses, stipends for 
alternative certification and scholarships, and to establish math and 
science summer workshops for teachers. Each eligible partnership 
receiving a grant under this Act must develop an evaluation and 
accountability plan that includes the following objectives and 
measures: improved student performance on state math and science 
assessments or on the Third International Math and Science Study 
assessment; increased participation by students in advanced courses in 
math and science; increased percentages of secondary school classes in 
math and science taught by teachers with majors in math and science; 
increased numbers of math and science teachers who participate in 
content-based professional development activities; and passing rates of 
students in advanced courses in math and science.
  Each partnership will be required to report the progress made toward 
these objectives to the Secretary annually. The Secretary will then 
determine whether or not the partnership is making substantial progress 
in meeting its goals. I urge my fellow colleagues to cosponsor the Math 
and Science Education Partnership Act.
  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. 461

       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 ``Mathematics and Science 
     Education Partnership and Teacher Recruitment Act of 2001''.

      SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to encourage States, 
     institutions of higher education, elementary schools, and 
     secondary schools to participate in programs that--
       (1) upgrade the status and stature of math and science 
     teaching as a profession by encouraging institutions of 
     higher education to assume greater responsibility for 
     improving math and science teacher education through the 
     establishment of a comprehensive, integrated system of 
     recruiting and advising such teachers;
       (2) focus on education of math and science teachers as a 
     career-long process that should continuously stimulate 
     teachers' intellectual growth and upgrade teachers' knowledge 
     and skills;
       (3) bring together elementary school and secondary school 
     math and science teachers with scientists, mathematicians, 
     and engineers to increase teacher content knowledge and 
     improve teaching skills through the use of more sophisticated 
     laboratory space and equipment, computing facilities, 
     libraries, and other resources that colleges and universities 
     are more able to provide; and
       (4) develop more rigorous mathematics and science curricula 
     that are aligned and intended to prepare students for 
     postsecondary study in mathematics and science.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Incorporation of General Definitions.--The provisions 
     of section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801) shall apply for purposes of this 
     Act in the same manner as they apply for purposes of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
       (b) Other Definitions.--In this Act:
       (1) Eligible partnership.--The term ``eligible 
     partnership'' means a partnership that--
       (A) shall include--
       (i) a State educational agency;
       (ii) a mathematics or science department of an institution 
     of higher education; and
       (iii) a local educational agency; and
       (B) may include--
       (i) another institution of higher education or the teacher 
     training department of such institution;
       (ii) another local educational agency, or an elementary 
     school or secondary school;
       (iii) a business; or
       (iv) a nonprofit organization of demonstrated 
     effectiveness, including a museum.
       (2) High need local educational agency.--The term ``high 
     need local educational agency'' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 201(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1021(b)).

[[Page 2887]]

       (3) Summer workshop or institute.--The term ``summer 
     workshop or institute'' means a workshop or institute 
     conducted outside of the academic year that--
       (A) is conducted during a period of a minimum of 2 weeks;
       (B) provides for direct interaction between students and 
     faculty; and
       (C) provides for followup training in the classroom during 
     the academic year for a period of a minimum of 3 days, which 
     shall not be required to be consecutive, except that--
       (i) if the program at the summer workshop or institute is 
     for a period of only 2 weeks, the followup training shall be 
     for a period of more than 3 days; and
       (ii) for teachers in rural school districts, followup 
     training through the Internet may be used.

     SEC. 4. GRANTS AUTHORIZED.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to award 
     grants, on a competitive basis, to eligible partnerships to 
     enable the eligible partnerships to pay the Federal share of 
     the costs of carrying out the authorized activities described 
     in section 6.
       (b) Duration.--The Secretary shall award grants under this 
     section for periods of 5 years.
       (c) Federal Share.--
       (1) In general.--The Federal share of the costs of the 
     activities assisted under this Act shall be--
       (A) 75 percent of the costs for the first year an eligible 
     partnership receives a grant payment under this Act;
       (B) 65 percent of the costs for the second such year; and
       (C) 50 percent of the costs for each of the third, fourth, 
     and fifth such years.
       (2) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the costs 
     of activities assisted under this Act may be provided in cash 
     or in kind, fairly evaluated.

     SEC. 5. APPLICATION.

       (a) In General.--Each eligible partnership desiring a grant 
     under this Act shall submit an application to the Secretary 
     at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by such 
     information as the Secretary may require.
       (b) Contents.--Each such application shall include--
       (1) an assessment of the teacher quality and professional 
     development needs of all the entities participating in the 
     eligible partnership with respect to the teaching and 
     learning of mathematics and science, including a statement as 
     to whether the eligible partnership includes a high need 
     local educational agency;
       (2) a description of how the activities to be carried out 
     by the eligible partnership will be aligned with State and 
     local standards and with other educational reform activities 
     that promote student achievement in mathematics and science;
       (3) a description of how the activities to be carried out 
     by the eligible partnership will be based on a review of 
     relevant research, and an explanation of why the activities 
     are expected to improve student performance and to strengthen 
     the quality of mathematics and science instruction; and
       (4) a description of--
       (A) how the eligible partnership will carry out the 
     authorized activities described in section 6; and
       (B) the eligible partnership's evaluation and 
     accountability plan described in section 7.
       (c) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority to any 
     application submitted by an eligible partnership that 
     includes a high need local educational agency.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES.

       An eligible partnership shall use the grant funds provided 
     under this Act for 1 or more of the following activities 
     related to elementary schools or secondary schools:
       (1) Developing or redesigning more rigorous mathematics and 
     science curricula that are aligned and intended to foster 
     college placement and preparation for postsecondary study in 
     mathematics and science.
       (2) Creating opportunities for enhanced and ongoing 
     professional development that improves the academic content 
     knowledge of mathematics and science teachers.
       (3) Recruiting mathematics and science majors to the 
     teaching profession through the use of--
       (A) signing bonuses and performance bonuses for mathematics 
     and science teachers;
       (B) stipends for mathematics teachers and science teachers 
     for certification through alternative routes;
       (C) scholarships for teachers to pursue advanced course 
     work in mathematics and science;
       (D) scholarships for students with academic majors in 
     mathematics and science; and
       (E) carrying out any other program that the State believes 
     to be effective in recruiting individuals with strong 
     mathematics or science backgrounds into the teaching 
     profession.
       (4) Promoting strong teaching skills for mathematics and 
     science teachers and teacher educators, including integrating 
     reliable research-based teaching methods into the curriculum.
       (5) Establishing mathematics and science summer workshops 
     or institutes and followup training for teachers, using 
     curricula that are experiment-oriented, content-based, and 
     grounded in current research.
       (6) Establishing web-based instructional materials for 
     mathematics and science teachers using curricula that are, 
     experiment-oriented, content-based, and grounded in current 
     research.
       (7) Designing programs to prepare a teacher to provide 
     professional development instruction to other teachers within 
     the participating teacher's school.
       (8) Designing programs to bring teachers into contact with 
     working scientists, mathematicians, and engineers to increase 
     teachers' content knowledge and enhance teachers' 
     instructional techniques.
       (9) Designing programs focusing on changing behaviors and 
     practices of teachers to assist novice teachers in developing 
     confidence in their skills to increase the likelihood that 
     such novice teachers will continue in the teaching 
     profession, and to generally improve the quality of teaching.

     SEC. 7. EVALUATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN.

       Each eligible partnership receiving a grant under this Act 
     shall develop an evaluation and accountability plan for 
     activities assisted under this Act that includes strong 
     performance objectives. The plan shall include objectives and 
     measures for--
       (1) improved student performance on State mathematics and 
     science assessments or on the Third International Math and 
     Science Study assessment;
       (2) increased participation by students in advanced courses 
     in mathematics and science;
       (3) increased percentages of secondary school classes in 
     mathematics and science taught by teachers with academic 
     majors in mathematics and science, respectively;
       (4) increased numbers of mathematics and science teachers 
     who participate in content-based professional development 
     activities; and
       (5) increased passing rates of students in advanced courses 
     in mathematics and science.

     SEC. 8. REPORT; REVOCATION OF GRANT.

       (a) Report.--Each eligible partnership receiving a grant 
     under this Act shall report annually to the Secretary 
     regarding the eligible partnership's progress in meeting the 
     performance objectives described in section 7.
       (b) Revocation.--If the Secretary determines that an 
     eligible partnership is not making substantial progress in 
     meeting the performance objectives described in section 7 by 
     the end of the third year of a grant under this Act, then the 
     grant payments shall not be made for the fourth and fifth 
     year of the grant.

     SEC. 9. CONSULTATION WITH NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION.

       In carrying out the activities authorized by this Act, the 
     Secretary shall consult and coordinate with the Director of 
     the National Science Foundation, particularly with respect to 
     the appropriate roles for the Department and the Foundation 
     in the conduct of summer workshops or institutes provided by 
     the mathematics and science partnerships to improve 
     mathematics and science teaching in the elementary schools 
     and secondary schools.

     SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act, $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2002 and such sums as may 
     be necessary for each of the 6 succeeding fiscal years.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KYL:
  S. 462. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 
credit against income tax for contributions to charitable organizations 
which provide scholarships for children to attend elementary and 
secondary schools; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
will provide new educational options to the students who need those 
options the most.
  While many Americans are satisfied with the public schools available 
to their children, we know that there are also many who are not, and 
with good reason.
  In large urban school districts, a majority of students drop out 
before high school graduation. Nearly 70 percent are unable to read at 
the so-called ``basic'' level. And all too frequently, violence and 
entrenched mediocrity create a climate where learning is actually 
discouraged.
  No wonder caring parents in such circumstances want alternatives.
  We have seen compelling evidence of the pent-up demand for different 
options when private organizations have invited low-income parents to 
apply for partial scholarships that could be used at a non-public 
school.
  Usually, these private scholarship programs are structured in such a 
way that, to be eligible for an award, a low-income family must agree 
to contribute a significant portion of the total tuition bill.

[[Page 2888]]

  The results are striking: In 1997, two distinguished business 
leaders, Ted Forstmann and John Walton invited applications for one 
thousand partial tuition scholarships from families here in the 
District of Columbia. Nearly eight thousand applications were received.
  In 1998, they formed an organization called the Children's 
Scholarship Fund to apply the idea on a national basis. They planned to 
offer 40,000 scholarships. 1.25 million applications were received.
  No less impressive than the numbers are the testimonials offered by 
parents who have been pleading for better options.
  One mother said the following about her experience: ``We would not be 
able to afford this without your help. Our daughter is really excited 
to be learning spelling and grammar, which was not being taught in 
public school. She's an aspiring writer and thinks this is great. My 
son has autism, and his new school had more services in place for him 
on the first day of school, without me even asking, than we've been 
able to pull out of the public school in six years! They both love 
their new schools and are doing well.''
  Here's another mother's testimony: I am so excited that my son has 
been chosen to receive a scholarship . . . One evening I sat on my bed 
and cried because I really wanted him to attend a private school but I 
know that I cannot afford all of the tuition. Therefore your 
scholarship fund was my only hope.''
  Yet another mother wrote, ``I cannot begin to tell you how grateful I 
am for this opportunity to send my children to a private school. As a 
low-income mother of four wonderful children with great potential, I 
would not be able to provide this chance for them without your help.
  This particular mother goes on to say, ``I have chosen,'' I cannot 
put enough stress on that word, ``chosen a school that will help 
nurture the seeds of greatness in them. I am sure that with this 
opportunity to succeed, my children will be successful and contribute 
greatly to society in the future.''
  Mr. President, in 1997, leaders in my state settled on a plan to help 
the private sector to satisfy that vast unmet demand for options. They 
instituted a state tax credit that allows Arizona residents to claim a 
dollar-for-dollar income tax credit for donations to school tuition 
organizations, like the Children's Scholarship Fund.
  Thanks to that program, 4,000 Arizona students, nearly all of them 
from disadvantaged backgrounds, have received scholarship assistance 
that has made it possible for them to enroll in a school of their 
choice. The number of school tuition organizations operating in the 
state has shot up from 2 to 33.
  The legislation I am introducing today would extend this Arizona idea 
nation-wide, and I am pleased that my Arizona colleague, Congressman 
John Shadegg, will introduce this legislation this week in the House of 
Representatives.
  By way of tribute to President Bush's more comprehensive education 
proposal, I have given this bill the title, ``The Leave No Child Behind 
Tax Credit Act of 2001.''
  The Leave No Child Behind Tax Credit Act would allow a family or 
business to claim a $250 tax credit for donations to qualified school 
tuition organizations. To qualify for that designation, an organization 
would have to devote at least 90 percent of its annual income to 
offering grants and scholarships for parents to use to send their 
children to the school of their choice.
  Scholarships awarded by such organizations could be used to offset 
tuition costs at a private school, or to pay the tuition costs families 
in most states must pay to enroll a child in a public school across 
district boundaries.
  This measure would move us toward an education policy that recognizes 
the vital importance of parental choice.
  It also recognizes and encourages the efforts that have been 
undertaken by public-spirited private citizens to find non-governmental 
solutions to the serious challenge of improving education in our 
country. These activists embody the vision set forth by President Bush 
in his inaugural address, the vision of responsible citizens building 
communities of service and a nation of character.
  Moreover, when parents are able to decide for themselves how to go 
about securing one of life's most vital goods, namely, education for 
their children, rather than having such decisions made for them by a 
bureaucracy, they become, in President Bush's memorable terms, 
citizens, not subjects.
  I believe that this legislation will help them to do that, and I am 
very pleased to introduce it today.
  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. 462

       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 ``Leave No Child Behind Tax 
     Credit Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS 
                   WHICH PROVIDE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR STUDENTS 
                   ATTENDING ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS.

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

     ``SEC. 30B. CREDIT FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO CHARITABLE 
                   ORGANIZATIONS WHICH PROVIDE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR 
                   STUDENTS ATTENDING ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY 
                   SCHOOLS.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--There shall be allowed as a 
     credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the 
     taxable year an amount equal to the qualified charitable 
     contributions of the taxpayer for the taxable year.
       ``(b) Maximum Credit.--The credit allowed by subsection (a) 
     for any taxable year shall not exceed $250 ($500, in the case 
     of a joint return).
       ``(c) Qualified Charitable Contribution.--For purposes of 
     this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified charitable 
     contribution' means, with respect to any taxable year, the 
     amount allowable as a deduction under section 170 (determined 
     without regard to subsection (d)(1)) for cash contributions 
     to a school tuition organization.
       ``(2) School tuition organization.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `school tuition organization' 
     means any organization described in section 170(c)(2) if the 
     annual disbursements of the organization for elementary and 
     secondary school scholarships are normally not less than 90 
     percent of the sum of such organization's annual gross income 
     and contributions and gifts.
       ``(B) Elementary and secondary school scholarship.--The 
     term `elementary and secondary school scholarship' means any 
     scholarship excludable from gross income under section 117 
     for expenses related to education at or below the 12th grade.
       ``(d) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Denial of double benefit.--No deduction shall be 
     allowed under this chapter for any contribution for which 
     credit is allowed under this section.
       ``(2) Application with other credits.--The credit allowable 
     under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed 
     the excess (if any) of--
       ``(A) the regular tax for the taxable year, reduced by the 
     sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and the 
     preceding sections of this subpart, over
       ``(B) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.
       ``(3) Controlled groups.--All persons who are treated as 
     one employer under subsection (a) or (b) of section 52 shall 
     be treated as 1 taxpayer for purposes of this section.
       ``(e) Election To Have Credit Not Apply.--A taxpayer may 
     elect to have this section not apply for any taxable year.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     B of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 30B. Credit for contributions to charitable organizations which 
              provide scholarships for students attending elementary 
              and secondary schools.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Feingold):
  S. 463. A bill to provide for increased access to HIV/AIDS-related 
treatments and services in developing foreign countries; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

[[Page 2889]]


  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, since the beginning of the AIDS 
epidemic, more than 17 million people in sub-Saharan Africa, one half 
the population of California, have died from AIDS.
  To begin to address this catastrophe, Senator Feingold and I 
introduced an Amendment to the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act that 
would have helped ensure access to generic AIDS drugs for nations in 
sub-Saharan Africa ravaged by the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
  Despite the fact that this amendment was approved by the Senate, it 
was stricken from the final Africa Trade Conference Report.
  Subsequently, the Clinton Administration issued an Executive Order 
that ensured that the countries of sub-Saharan Africa could provide 
their people with affordable HIV/AIDS drugs.
  And, two weeks ago, I am pleased to note, the Bush Administration 
indicated that it would not seek to overturn this Executive Order.
  Now, Senator Feingold and I have developed the ``Global Access to 
AIDS Treatment Act of 2001'' which, among other provisions: Codifies 
the Executive Order into law; Directs that the law must apply to the 48 
nations of sub-Saharan Africa; and expands the scope of the law to 
cover all developing nations facing a catastrophic AIDS crisis.
  Unless the United States takes a leadership role in recognizing, as 
does the WTO TRIPS agreement, that there is a moral obligation to put 
people over profits, the human devastation and social instability that 
has already begun in countries facing an AIDS crisis will grow to 
unfathomable levels.
  Until recently, many people have been unaware of the depth of the 
global loss being caused by this epidemic.
  The HIV virus has infected over 36 million people worldwide, with 
over 95 percent of those infected living outside of the United States.
  Over 21.8 million people have died from HIV/AIDS world-wide since the 
beginning of the epidemic, 3 million in 2000 alone.
  In sub-Saharan Africa, where 70 percent of all deaths from HIV/AIDS 
have occurred, 17 million people, as I said before, have died from HIV/
AIDS since the epidemic began, and 2.4 million in the year 2000.
  To address this pandemic, Senator Feingold and I have developed 
legislation to address the crisis. This legislation does the following:
  First, this legislation directs the U.S. Government to refrain from 
seeking the revision of any law, imposed by a government of a 
developing nation facing an AIDS crisis, that promotes access to HIV/
AIDS pharmaceuticals and medical technologies.
  This will ensure that HIV/AIDS drugs are more affordable and more 
available to those most in need.
  Second, this legislation authorizes $25 million a year for programs 
to develop and strengthen health care infrastructure in developing 
countries.
  Third, the legislation calls upon the World Health Organization and 
UNAIDS to take the lead in organizing efficient procurement of 
compulsory licenses of pharmaceutical patents, active ingredients of 
drugs, and finished medications for countries that require this 
assistance.
  Fourth, this legislation calls on the National Institutes of Health, 
NIH, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, to work 
with developing countries and international service providers to 
develop best practices for delivering pharmaceuticals to those who need 
them.
  Fifth, this legislation requires the Food and Drug Administration, 
FDA, and NIH to develop and maintain a database for information on 
drugs, patent status, and treatment protocols to assist health-care 
providers from around the globe in providing the best care possible to 
all patients.
  And finally, this legislation provides $1 million a year to encourage 
American physicians, nurses, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, 
public health workers, pharmacists, and other health professionals to 
provide HIV/AIDS care and treatment in developing countries.
  This legislation will allow countries facing an HIV/AIDS crisis to 
better determine the availability of HIV/AIDS pharmaceuticals in their 
countries, and provide their people with affordable HIV/AIDS drugs.
  It is clearly in the national interest of the United States to 
prevent the further spread of HIV/AIDS, and I believe that this 
legislation is necessary to continue to assist the countries of the 
developing world to bring this deadly disease under control.
  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. 463

       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 ``Global Access to AIDS 
     Treatment Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF POLICY.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Since the HIV/AIDS pandemic began, it has claimed 
     21,800,000 lives.
       (2) Over 17,000,000 men, women, and children, have died due 
     to AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa alone.
       (3) Over 36,000,000 people are infected with the HIV virus 
     today. Over 25,000,000 live in sub-Saharan Africa.
       (4) By 2010, approximately 40,000,000 children worldwide 
     will have lost one or both of their parents to HIV/AIDS.
       (5) Access to effective treatment for HIV/AIDS is 
     determined by issues of price, health system infrastructure, 
     and sustainable financing.
       (6) In January 2000, the National Intelligence Council 
     released an intelligence estimate that framed the HIV/AIDS 
     pandemic as a security threat, noting the relationship 
     between the disease and political and economic instability.
       (7) The overriding priority for responding to the HIV/AIDS 
     crisis should be to emphasize and encourage prevention.
       (8) An effective response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic must 
     also involve assistance to stimulate the development of 
     health service delivery infrastructure in affected States.
       (9) An effective United States response to the HIV/AIDS 
     crisis must also focus on the development of HIV/AIDS 
     vaccines to prevent the spread of the disease.
       (10) The innovative capacity of the United States in the 
     commercial and public pharmaceutical research sectors is 
     unmatched in the world, and the participation of both these 
     sectors will be a critical element in any successful strategy 
     to respond to the global HIV/AIDS crisis.
       (b) Declaration of Policy.--Congress declares that it is 
     the policy of the United States that the United States will 
     not seek, through negotiation or otherwise, the revocation or 
     revision of intellectual property or competition laws or 
     policies that regulate pharmaceuticals or medical 
     technologies used to treat HIV/AIDS or the most common 
     opportunistic infections that accompany HIV/AIDS in any 
     foreign country undergoing an HIV/AIDS-related public health 
     crisis if the laws or policies of that foreign country--
       (1) promote access to the pharmaceuticals or medical 
     technologies for affected populations; and
       (2) provide intellectual property protection consistent 
     with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual 
     Property Rights referred to in paragraph (15) of section 
     101(d) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 
     3511(d)(15)).

     SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE SENATE.

       It is the sense of the Senate--
       (1) to encourage the World Health Organization and the 
     Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) to carry 
     out HIV/AIDS activities in foreign countries that are 
     undergoing an HIV/AIDS-related public health crisis, 
     including activities that are consistent with the policy 
     described in section 2(b); and
       (2) that the World Health Organization and the Joint United 
     Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) should lead the 
     international organization of the manufacture and 
     distribution of pharmaceuticals or medical technologies for 
     HIV/AIDS, including the global registration of products and 
     the organization of the efficient procurement of compulsory 
     licenses, active ingredients, and finished products for 
     foreign countries that require such assistance.

     SEC. 4. PARALLEL IMPORTING AND COMPULSORY LICENSING.

       Section 182(d)(4) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2242(d)(4)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``A foreign'' and inserting ``(A) Except as 
     provided in subparagraph (A), a foreign''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B)(i) With respect to a foreign country that is 
     undergoing an HIV/AIDS-related public health crisis and that 
     is propounding or implementing laws or policies that regulate 
     pharmaceuticals or medical technologies used to treat HIV/
     AIDS, or the most common opportunistic infections that 
     accompany HIV/AIDS, subparagraph (A) shall not apply

[[Page 2890]]

     to such country with respect to such pharmaceuticals and 
     technologies.
       ``(ii) With respect to a foreign country described in 
     clause (i), if the laws or policies of that country promote 
     access to the pharmaceuticals or medical technologies 
     described in such clause for affected populations within the 
     country or within other countries undergoing an HIV/AIDS-
     related public health crisis, compliance with the specific 
     obligations of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of 
     Intellectual Property Rights referred to in section 
     101(d)(15) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act shall be 
     construed to provide adequate and effective protection of 
     intellectual property rights for the purposes of this Act, 
     and the President shall instruct the United States Trade 
     Representative not to seek, through negotiation or otherwise, 
     the revocation or revision of such laws or policies.''; and
       ``(C) For purposes of this paragraph, the term `foreign 
     country that is undergoing an HIV/AIDS-related public health 
     crisis' means any of the 48 foreign countries of sub-Saharan 
     Africa, and any additional country determined to be 
     undergoing such a crisis by the President.''.

     SEC. 5. DEVELOPMENT OF TREATMENT PROTOCOLS.

       (a) In General.--The Director of the National Institutes of 
     Health and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control 
     and Prevention shall, in collaboration with the entities 
     described in subsection (b), conduct a needs-assessment and 
     develop and implement simplified and adapted protocols for 
     the delivery of HIV/AIDS treatments in the resource poor 
     settings of the developing world.
       (b) Collaborative Entities.--The entities described in this 
     subsection are--
       (1) the Administrator of the United States Agency for 
     International Development;
       (2) developing foreign countries that face HIV/AIDS health 
     care crises; and
       (3) appropriate international organizations.

     SEC. 6. HEALTH CARE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, acting through the Administrator of the United 
     States Agency for International Development, shall--
       (1) develop and implement programs to strengthen and 
     broaden health care systems infrastructure, and the capacity 
     of health care systems in developing foreign countries to 
     deliver HIV/AIDS pharmaceuticals;
       (2) provide assistance to foreign countries that the 
     Administrator determines are ready to implement anti-retro 
     viral treatment programs with respect to HIV/AIDS; and
       (3) provide assistance to improve access to medical 
     education, including nursing education, in foreign countries 
     that are severely affected by the HIV/AIDS virus.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $25,000,000 for 
     each fiscal year.

     SEC. 7. INTERNATIONAL DATABASE OF HIV/AIDS PHARMACEUTICALS.

       The Commissioner of Food and Drugs, in consultation with 
     the Director of the National Institutes of Health, shall 
     develop and maintain a database of HIV/AIDS pharmaceuticals. 
     Such database shall include information about patent status, 
     recommended protocols, price, and quality.

     SEC. 8. LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR INTERNATIONAL HIV/
                   PHARMACEUTICAL WORK.

       Title XXVI of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     300ff-11 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

                   ``PART G--INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

     ``SEC. 2695. FOREIGN HIV/AIDS ASSISTANCE LOAN REPAYMENT 
                   PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     program to be known as the Foreign HIV/AIDS Assistance Loan 
     Repayment Program to encourage physicians, nurses, physician 
     assistants, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, others trained 
     in the field of public health, and other health professionals 
     determined appropriate by the Secretary to provide HIV/AIDS 
     treatment and care in developing foreign countries.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to participate in the 
     Loan Repayment Program, an individual must--
       ``(1) have a degree in medicine, osteopathic medicine, or 
     other health profession, or be registered or certified as a 
     nurse or physician assistant; and
       ``(2) submit to the Secretary an application for a contract 
     described in subsection (f) (relating to the payment by the 
     Secretary of the educational loans of the individual in 
     consideration of the individual serving for a period of 
     obligated service).
       ``(c) Application, Contract, and Information 
     Requirements.--
       ``(1) Summary and information.--In disseminating 
     application forms and contract forms to individuals desiring 
     to participate in the Loan Repayment Program, the Secretary 
     shall include with such forms--
       ``(A) a fair summary of the rights and liabilities of an 
     individual whose application is approved (and whose contract 
     is accepted) by the Secretary, including in the summary a 
     clear explanation of the damages to which the United States 
     is entitled in the case of the individual's breach of the 
     contract; and
       ``(B) information respecting meeting a service obligation 
     through private practice under an agreement under subsection 
     (f) and such other information as may be necessary for the 
     individual to understand the individual's prospective 
     participation in the Loan Repayment Program.
       ``(2) Understandability.--The application form, contract 
     form, and all other information furnished by the Secretary 
     under this section shall be written in a manner calculated to 
     be understood by the average individual applying to 
     participate in the Loan Repayment Program.
       ``(3) Availability.--The Secretary shall make such 
     application forms, contract forms, and other information 
     available to individuals desiring to participate in the Loan 
     Repayment Program on a date sufficiently early to ensure that 
     such individuals have adequate time to carefully review and 
     evaluate such forms and information.
       ``(4) Recruitment and retention.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall distribute to health 
     professions schools materials providing information on the 
     Loan Repayment Program and shall encourage the schools to 
     disseminate the materials to the students of the schools.
       ``(B) Retention.--In the case of any health professional 
     whose period of obligated service under the Loan Repayment 
     Program is nearing completion, the Secretary shall encourage 
     the individual to remain in a developing foreign country and 
     to continue providing HIV/AIDS-related services.
       ``(d) Considerations with Respect to Contracts.--
       ``(1) In general.--In providing contracts under the Loan 
     Repayment Program--
       ``(A) the Secretary shall consider the extent of the 
     demonstrated interest of the applicants for the contracts in 
     providing HIV/AIDS-related services; and
       ``(B) may consider such other factors regarding the 
     applicants as the Secretary determines to be relevant to 
     selecting qualified individuals to participate in such 
     Program, such as relevant HIV/AIDS-related or international 
     health work or volunteer experiences.
       ``(2) Priority.--In providing contracts under the Loan 
     Repayment Program, the Secretary shall give priority--
       ``(A) to any application for such a contract submitted by 
     an individual whose training is in a health profession or 
     specialty determined by the Secretary to be needed; and
       ``(B) to any application for such a contract submitted by 
     an individual who has (and whose spouse, if any, has) 
     characteristics that increase the probability that the 
     individual will continue to serve in a developing foreign 
     country after the period of obligated service pursuant to 
     subsection (f) is completed.
       ``(e) Approval Required for Participation.--An individual 
     becomes a participant in the Loan Repayment Program only upon 
     the Secretary and the individual entering into a written 
     contract described in subsection (f).
       ``(f) Contents of Contracts.--The written contract between 
     the Secretary and an individual shall contain--
       ``(1) an agreement that--
       ``(A) subject to paragraph (3), the Secretary agrees to pay 
     on behalf of the individual loans in accordance with 
     subsection (g) or to defer payment on such loans; and
       ``(B) subject to paragraph (3), the individual agrees--
       ``(i) to accept loan payments on behalf of the individual 
     or a deferment in payments; and
       ``(ii) to serve for a time period (hereinafter in this 
     subpart referred to as the `period of obligated service') 
     equal to 2 years or such longer period as the individual may 
     agree to, as a provider of HIV/AIDS-related health services 
     in a developing foreign country;
       ``(2) a provision permitting the Secretary to extend for 
     such longer additional periods, as the individual may agree 
     to, the period of obligated service agreed to by the 
     individual;
       ``(3) a provision that any financial obligation of the 
     United States arising out of a contract entered into under 
     this section and any obligation of the individual that is 
     conditioned thereon, is contingent on funds being 
     appropriated for loan repayments or deferments under this 
     section;
       ``(4) a statement of the damages to which the United States 
     is entitled for the individual's breach of the contract; and
       ``(5) such other statements of the rights and liabilities 
     of the Secretary and of the individual, not inconsistent with 
     this section.
       ``(g) Payments or Deferments.--
       ``(1) In general.--A loan repayment provided for an 
     individual under a written contract under the Loan Repayment 
     Program shall consist of payment, in accordance with 
     paragraph (2), on behalf of the individual of the principal, 
     interest, and related expenses on government and commercial 
     loans received by the individual regarding the graduate 
     education of the individual, or the deferment of repayments 
     on such loans, which loans were made for--
       ``(A) tuition expenses;

[[Page 2891]]

       ``(B) all other reasonable educational expenses, including 
     fees, books, and laboratory expenses, incurred by the 
     individual; or
       ``(C) reasonable living expenses as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(2) Payments for years served.--
       ``(A) In general.--For each year of obligated service that 
     an individual contracts to serve under subsection (f) the 
     Secretary may pay or defer up to $5,000 on behalf of the 
     individual for loans described in paragraph (1). In making a 
     determination of the amount to pay or defer for a year of 
     such service by an individual, the Secretary shall consider 
     the extent to which each such determination--
       ``(i) affects the ability of the Secretary to maximize the 
     number of contracts that can be provided under the Loan 
     Repayment Program from the amounts appropriated for such 
     contracts;
       ``(ii) provides an incentive to serve in a developing 
     foreign country with the greatest such shortages; and
       ``(iii) provides an incentive with respect to the health 
     professional involved remaining in a developing foreign 
     country, and continuing to provide HIV/AIDS-related services, 
     after the completion of the period of obligated service under 
     the Loan Repayment Program.
       ``(B) Repayment schedule.--Any arrangement made by the 
     Secretary for the making of loan repayments in accordance 
     with this subsection shall provide that any repayments for a 
     year of obligated service shall be made no later than the end 
     of the fiscal year in which the individual completes such 
     year of service.
       ``(3) Tax liability.--For the purpose of providing 
     reimbursements for tax liability resulting from payments or 
     deferments under this subsection on behalf of an individual--
       ``(A) the Secretary shall, in addition to such payments, 
     make payments to the individual in an amount equal to 39 
     percent of the total amount of loan repayments made for the 
     taxable year involved; and
       ``(B) may make such additional payments as the Secretary 
     determines to be appropriate with respect to such purpose.
       ``(4) Payment schedule.--The Secretary may enter into an 
     agreement with the holder of any loan for which payments are 
     made under the Loan Repayment Program to establish a schedule 
     for the making of such payments or deferments.
       ``(h) Reports.--Not later than March 1 of each year, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Congress a report providing, 
     with respect to the preceding fiscal year--
       ``(1) the total amount of loan payments or deferments made 
     under the Loan Repayment Program;
       ``(2) the number of applications filed under this section;
       ``(3) the number, and type of health profession training, 
     of individuals receiving loan repayments or deferments under 
     such Program;
       ``(4) the educational institution at which such individuals 
     received their training;
       ``(5) the total amount of the indebtedness of such 
     individuals for educational loans as of the date on which the 
     individuals become participants in such Program;
       ``(6) the number of years of obligated service specified 
     for such individuals in the initial contracts under 
     subsection (f), and, in the case of individuals whose period 
     of such service has been completed, the total number of years 
     for which the individuals provided HIV/AIDS-related services 
     in a developing foreign country (including any extensions 
     made for purposes of paragraph (2) of such subsection);
       ``(7)(A) the number, and type of health professions 
     training, of such individuals who have breached the contract 
     under subsection (f); and
       ``(B) with respect to such individuals--
       ``(i) the educational institutions with respect to which 
     payments or deferments have been made or were to be made 
     under the contract;
       ``(ii) the amounts for which the individuals are liable to 
     the United States;
       ``(iii) the extent of payment by the individuals of such 
     amounts; and
       ``(iv) if known, the basis for the decision of the 
     individuals to breach the contract under subsection (f); and
       ``(8) the effectiveness of the Secretary in recruiting 
     health professionals to participate in the Loan Repayment 
     Program, and in encouraging and assisting such professionals 
     with respect to providing HIV/AIDS-related services in 
     developing foreign countries after the completion of the 
     period of obligated service under such Program.
       ``(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, 
     $1,000,000 for each fiscal year.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAYH (for himself and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 464. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 
tax credit for long-term care givers; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, we have spent the last week discussing the 
importance of tax cuts for all Americans. While we discuss fiscally 
responsible means to provide financial benefits to all Americans we 
need to remember there are millions of Americans that are taking on 
extra financial burdens by taking care of a loved one at home. These 
caregivers deserve financial assistance.
  America is aging, we are all living longer and generally healthier 
and more productive lives. In the next 30 years, the number of 
Americans over the age of 65 will double. For most Americans this is 
good news. However, for some families aging comes with unique financial 
obstacles. More and more middle income families are forced to choose 
between providing educational expenses for their children, saving for 
their own retirement, and providing medical care for their parents and 
grandparents. When a loved one becomes ill and needs to be cared for, 
nothing is more challenging then deciding how the care they need should 
be provided. Today, I rise again to make that decision easier and to 
strengthen one option for long-term care caring for a loved one at 
home.
  The bill I am reintroducing today, the Care Assistance and Resource 
Enhancement Tax Credit, will provide caregivers with a $3,000 tax 
credit for the services they provide. I am reintroducing this bill in 
order to encourage families to take care of their loved ones, by making 
it more affordable for seniors to stay at home and receive the care 
they need, while saving the government billions of dollars currently 
spent on institutional care. Through this tax credit, we accomplish all 
that while emphasizing family values.
  There are over 22 million people providing unpaid help with personal 
needs or household chores to a relative or friend who is at least 50 
years old. In Indiana alone, there are 568,300 caregivers. They do this 
work without any compensation. They do not send the government a bill 
for their services or get reimbursed for their expenses by a private 
company. They do it because they care. As a result of their compassion, 
the government saves billions of dollars. For example, the average cost 
of a nursing home is $46,000 a year. The government spent approximately 
$32 billion in formal home health care costs and $83 billion in nursing 
home costs. If you add up all the private sector and government 
spending on long-term care it is dwarfed by the amount families spend 
caring for loved ones in their homes. As a study published by the 
Alzheimers Association indicated, caregivers provide $196 billion worth 
of care a year.
  I held a field hearing in my state, Indiana, in August of 1999 to 
discuss ways to make long-term care more affordable. At this hearing, I 
heard from three caregivers who are providing care for a family member. 
Mrs. Linda McKinstry takes care of her husband who had been diagnosed 
with Alzheimers two years ago. Mr. and Mrs. Cahee are caregivers for 
Mr. Cahee's mother who also has Alzheimers. They all echoed the need 
for financial relief and support services. They spoke of the financial 
and emotional stress associated with taking care of a loved one. After 
hearing their stories, it became clear that their efforts are truly 
heroic and we should be doing all that we can at the federal level to 
provide what they need to keep their families together.
  At a time when people are becoming skeptical of the government, 
Congress needs to help people meet the challenges they face in their 
daily lives. This tax credit does that. It will serve 1.2 million older 
Americans, over 500,000 non-elderly adults, and approximately 250,000 
children a year. I am encouraged by the inclusion of this tax credit in 
Senator Daschle's targeted tax package. I urge my colleagues to take 
notice of the work done by caregivers and join me in supporting this 
legislation and giving caregivers the gratitude they deserve.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD:
  S. 465. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 
credit for residential solar energy property; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President. I am honored today to introduce the 
Residential Solar Energy Tax Credit Act of 2001 which provides a 15 
percent residential tax credit for consumers who

[[Page 2892]]

purchase solar electric, photovoltaics, and solar thermal products. 
This bill is similar to one I introduced in the last Congress. I 
believe we have a wonderful opportunity to address this important 
energy issue and pass this bill.
  The legislation is an important step in preserving U.S. global 
leadership in the solar industry where we now export over 70 percent of 
our products. In recent years, over ten U.S. solar manufacturing 
facilities have been built or expanded making the U.S. the world's 
largest manufacturer of solar products. The expansion of the U.S. 
domestic market is essential to sustain U.S. global market dominance.
  Other countries, notably Japan and Germany, have instituted very 
large-scale market incentives for the use of solar energy on buildings, 
spending far more by their governments to build their respective 
domestic solar industries. Passage of this bill will insure the U.S. 
stays the global solar market leader into the next millennium.
  Recent tax legislation passed by this body, has included necessary 
support of the independent domestic oil producers, overseas oil 
refiners, nuclear industry decommissioning, and wind energy, all 
worthy. This small proposal not only adds to these but provides an 
incentive to the individual homeowner to generate their own energy. In 
fact, 28 states have passed laws in the last two years to provide a 
technical standard for interconnecting solar systems to the electric 
grid, provide consumer friendly contracts, and provide rates for the 
excess power generated. These efforts at regulatory reform at the state 
level combined with a limited incentive as proposed in this bill, will 
drive the use of solar energy.
  Contrary to popular belief, solar energy is manufactured and used 
evenly throughout the United States. Solar manufacturers are in 
Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, 
Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, 
North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. In 
addition, solar assembly and distribution companies are in: Alaska, 
Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, 
Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode 
Island, Tennessee, Vermont, as well as Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin 
Islands, and Guam. In addition to these states, solar component and 
research companies are in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, 
Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and West Virginia.
  More than 90 U.S. electric utilities including municipals, 
cooperatives and independents--which represent more than half of U.S. 
power generation--are active in solar energy. Aside from new, automated 
solar manufacturing facilities, a wide range of new uses of solar has 
occurred in the last two years, such as: an array of facilities 
installed in June at the Pentagon power block to provide mid-day peak 
power; installation of solar on the first U.S. skyscraper in Times 
Square in New York City; and development of a solar mini-manufacturing 
facility at a brown field in Chicago which will provide solar products 
for roadway lighting and for area schools.
  This small sampling of American ingenuity is just the beginning of 
the U.S. solar industry's maturity. Adoption of solar power by 
individual American consumers will create economies-of-scale of 
production that will, over time, dramatically lower costs and increase 
availability of solar power.
  The bill I have introduced costs much less than previous proposals 
and provides consumer safeguards. This bill represents a pragmatic 
approach in utilizing the marketplace as a driver of technology. The 
benefits to our country are profound. The U.S. solar industry believes 
the incentives will create 20,000 new high technology manufacturing 
jobs, offset pollution of more than 2 million vehicles, cut U.S. solar 
energy unit imports which are already over 50 percent, and leverage 
U.S. industry even further into the global export markets.
  The Residential Solar Energy Tax Credit Act of 2001 is sound energy 
policy, sound environmental policy, promotes our national security, and 
enhances our economic strength at home and abroad. I ask my colleagues 
to include this initiative in any upcoming tax and/or energy 
deliberations. American consumers will thank us, and our children will 
thank us for the future benefits we have preserved for them.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent 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. 465

       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 ``Residential Solar Energy Tax 
     Credit Act''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR RESIDENTIAL SOLAR ENERGY PROPERTY.

       (a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 25A the following new section:

     ``SEC. 25B. RESIDENTIAL SOLAR ENERGY PROPERTY.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual, 
     there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by 
     this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the sum 
     of--
       ``(1) 15 percent of the qualified photovoltaic property 
     expenditures made by the taxpayer during such year, and
       ``(2) 15 percent of the qualified solar water heating 
     property expenditures made by the taxpayer during the taxable 
     year.
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Maximum credit.--The credit allowed under subsection 
     (a)(2) shall not exceed $2,000 for each system of solar 
     energy property.
       ``(2) Type of property.--No expenditure may be taken into 
     account under this section unless such expenditure is made by 
     the taxpayer for property installed on or in connection with 
     a dwelling unit which is located in the United States and 
     which is used as a residence.
       ``(3) Safety certifications.--No credit shall be allowed 
     under this section for an item of property unless--
       ``(A) in the case of solar water heating equipment, such 
     equipment is certified for performance and safety by the non-
     profit Solar Rating Certification Corporation or a comparable 
     entity endorsed by the government of the State in which such 
     property is installed, and
       ``(B) in the case of a photovoltaic system, such system 
     meets appropriate fire and electric code requirements.
       ``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Qualified solar water heating property expenditure.--
     The term `qualified solar water heating property expenditure' 
     means an expenditure for property that uses solar energy to 
     heat water for use in a dwelling unit with respect to which a 
     majority of the energy is derived from the sun.
       ``(2) Qualified photovoltaic property expenditure.--The 
     term `qualified photovoltaic property expenditure' means an 
     expenditure for property that uses solar energy to generate 
     electricity for use in a dwelling unit.
       ``(3) Solar panels.--No expenditure relating to a solar 
     panel or other property installed as a roof (or portion 
     thereof) shall fail to be treated as property described in 
     paragraph (1) or (2) solely because it constitutes a 
     structural component of the structure on which it is 
     installed.
       ``(4) Labor costs.--Expenditures for labor costs properly 
     allocable to the onsite preparation, assembly, or original 
     installation of the property described in paragraph (1) or 
     (2) and for piping or wiring to interconnect such property to 
     the dwelling unit shall be taken into account for purposes of 
     this section.
       ``(5) Swimming pools, etc., used as storage medium.--
     Expenditures which are properly allocable to a swimming pool, 
     hot tub, or any other energy storage medium which has a 
     function other than the function of such storage shall not be 
     taken into account for purposes of this section.
       ``(d) Special Rules.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Dollar amounts in case of joint occupancy.--In the 
     case of any dwelling unit which is jointly occupied and used 
     during any calendar year as a residence by 2 or more 
     individuals the following shall apply:
       ``(A) The amount of the credit allowable under subsection 
     (a) by reason of expenditures (as the case may be) made 
     during such calendar year by any of such individuals with 
     respect to such dwelling unit shall be determined by treating 
     all of such individuals as 1 taxpayer whose taxable year is 
     such calendar year.
       ``(B) There shall be allowable with respect to such 
     expenditures to each of such individuals, a credit under 
     subsection (a) for the taxable year in which such calendar 
     year ends in an amount which bears the same ratio to the 
     amount determined under subparagraph (A) as the amount of 
     such expenditures made by such individual during such 
     calendar year bears to the aggregate of such

[[Page 2893]]

     expenditures made by all of such individuals during such 
     calendar year.
       ``(2) Tenant-stockholder in cooperative housing 
     corporation.--In the case of an individual who is a tenant-
     stockholder (as defined in section 216) in a cooperative 
     housing corporation (as defined in such section), such 
     individual shall be treated as having made his tenant-
     stockholder's proportionate share (as defined in section 
     216(b)(3)) of any expenditures of such corporation.
       ``(3) Condominiums.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of an individual who is a 
     member of a condominium management association with respect 
     to a condominium which he owns, such individual shall be 
     treated as having made his proportionate share of any 
     expenditures of such association.
       ``(B) Condominium management association.--For purposes of 
     this paragraph, the term `condominium management association' 
     means an organization which meets the requirements of 
     paragraph (1) of section 528(c) (other than subparagraph (E) 
     thereof) with respect to a condominium project substantially 
     all of the units of which are used as residences.
       ``(4) Joint ownership of items of solar energy property.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any expenditure otherwise qualifying as 
     an expenditure described in paragraph (1) or (2) of 
     subsection (c) shall not be treated as failing to so qualify 
     merely because such expenditure was made with respect to 2 or 
     more dwelling units.
       ``(B) Limits applied separately.--In the case of any 
     expenditure described in subparagraph (A), the amount of the 
     credit allowable under subsection (a) shall (subject to 
     paragraph (1)) be computed separately with respect to the 
     amount of the expenditure made for each dwelling unit.
       ``(5) Allocation in certain cases.--If less than 80 percent 
     of the use of an item is for nonbusiness residential 
     purposes, only that portion of the expenditures for such item 
     which is properly allocable to use for nonbusiness 
     residential purposes shall be taken into account. For 
     purposes of this paragraph, use for a swimming pool shall be 
     treated as use which is not for residential purposes.
       ``(6) When expenditure made; amount of expenditure.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     an expenditure with respect to an item shall be treated as 
     made when the original installation of the item is completed.
       ``(B) Expenditures part of building construction.--In the 
     case of an expenditure in connection with the construction or 
     reconstruction of a structure, such expenditure shall be 
     treated as made when the original use of the constructed or 
     reconstructed structure by the taxpayer begins.
       ``(C) Amount.--The amount of any expenditure shall be the 
     cost thereof.
       ``(e) Basis Adjustments.--For purposes of this subtitle, if 
     a credit is allowed under this section for any expenditure 
     with respect to any property, the increase in the basis of 
     such property which would (but for this subsection) result 
     from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount of the 
     credit so allowed.
       ``(f) Termination.--The credit allowed under this section 
     shall not apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2006.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Subsection (a) of section 1016 of such Code is amended 
     by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (26), by striking 
     the period at the end of paragraph (27) and inserting ``; 
     and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(28) to the extent provided in section 25B(e), in the 
     case of amounts with respect to which a credit has been 
     allowed under section 25B.''.
       (2) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 25A the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 25B. Residential solar energy property.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 2001.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HAGEL (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Dodd, 
        Mr. Roberts, Mr. Harkin, Ms. Collins, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Snowe, 
        and Mr. Reed):
  S. 466. A bill to amend the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act to fully fund 40 percent of the average per pupil expenditure for 
programs under part B of such Act; to the Committee on Health 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I join with nine of my colleagues today in 
introducing the ``Helping Children Succeed by Fully Funding the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.'' I am pleased that 
Senators Jim Jeffords, Ted Kennedy, Pat Roberts, Chris Dodd, Susan 
Collins, Tom Harkin, Olympia Snowe, Patty Murray, and Jack Reed have 
agreed to serve as original co-sponsors of this important legislation.
  This bill will have the Federal government fully meet its funding 
responsibilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 
IDEA, for the first time since it was enacted in 1975. When Congress 
passed the IDEA a quarter of a century ago, it agreed that the Federal 
government would pay 40 percent of the cost of ensuring that all 
children, including those with disabilities, receive a free, 
appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment. That 
is the laudable goal of the legislation, one we all share. Sadly, 
however, we have never in all these years met our funding commitment. 
Despite substantial progress over the last five years, Congress has 
never appropriated more than 15 percent of the cost of IDEA. The bill 
we introduce today will finally make good on Congress's commitment to 
fund 40 percent of the cost of educating children with disabilities. In 
so doing, it will strengthen the ability of States and local school 
districts in implementing IDEA and serve the children with disabilities 
who are covered by its provisions.
  Our IDEA full funding legislation is very simple. It would obligate 
Federal funds to increase funding under Part B of the IDEA program by 
annual increments of $2.5 billion until the full 40 percent share of 
funding is reached in fiscal year 2007. Last year, fiscal year 2001, 
Congress appropriated $6.3 billion for Part B. With these annual 
increments, the legislation would obligate an additional $37.5 billion 
over five years, or $52.4 billion over six years.
  Let me note that this legislation does not establish a new Federal 
mandate or entitlement, State and Federal courts and IDEA have already 
firmly established the right of a child with a disability to a free, 
appropriate education. The Federal government's failure for 25 years to 
contribute its share of these costs has simply shifted this Federal 
share onto State and local education agencies. Our bill will redress 
this failure: Federal funds will finally be provided to meet the 
Federal share.
  IDEA has been a great success. Prior to its enactment, only 50 
percent of students with disabilities were receiving an appropriate 
education, 30 percent were receiving inappropriate education services, 
and 20 percent were receiving no education services at all. Today the 
majority of children with disabilities are receiving an education in 
their neighborhood schools in regular classrooms with their non-
disabled peers. High school graduation rates have increased 
dramatically among students with disabilities, a 14 percent increase 
from 1984 to 1997. More students with disabilities are attending 
colleges and universities. And students who have been served by IDEA 
are employed at twice the rate of older adults who were not served by 
IDEA. IDEA has played a very important role in raising our nation's 
awareness about the abilities and capabilities of children with 
disabilities.
  Last November we celebrated IDEA's 25th anniversary. It is time to 
make good on our promise to fully fund this very worthwhile program, 
which is making such an important difference in the lives of so very 
many of our nation's children.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is an honor to join my colleagues 
Senators Chuck Hagel and Jim Jeffords in introducing the Helping 
Children Succeed by Fully Funding the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act, IDEA--the hallmark of which is to put real dollars 
behind the goal of fully funding the IDEA.
  Congress owes the children and families across the country the most 
effective possible implementation of this legislation, and the federal 
funding support necessary to make it happen. For 25 years, IDEA has 
sent a clear message to young people with disabilities--that they can 
learn, and that their learning will enable them to become independent 
and productive citizens, and live fulfilling lives.
  Prior to 1975, 4 million disabled children did not receive the help 
they needed to be successful in school. Few disabled preschoolers 
received services, and 1 million disabled children were excluded from 
public schools. Now IDEA

[[Page 2894]]

serves almost 6 million disabled children from birth through age 21, 
and every State in the Nation offers public education and early 
intervention services to disabled children. The record of success is 
astonishing.
  The drop out rate for these students has decreased, while the 
graduation rate has increased. The number of young adults with 
disabilities enrolling in college has more than tripled, and now more 
than ever disabled students are communicating and exploring the world 
through new technologies.
  These accomplishments do not come without financial costs, and it is 
time for Congress to meet its financial commitment to help schools 
provide the services and supports that give children with special needs 
the educational opportunities to pursue their dreams.
  Today we are introducing legislation to address that need and assist 
our schools to meet their responsibility to provide an equal and 
appropriate educational opportunity for children with disabilities. In 
my State of Massachusetts alone, this increase will provide $409 
million over the next 6 years to help meet that goal.
  Just as we are committed to increase funding for IDEA, we must be 
equally committed to the making sure that this law is implemented and 
vigorously enforced.
  Far too many students with disabilities are still not getting the 
educational services they are entitled to receive under the IDEA. We 
must never go back to the days when large numbers of disabled children 
were left out and left behind.
  I look forward to working with the Administration and all Members of 
Congress to enact this legislation. Fully funding IDEA moves us closer 
to ensuring the success of every child by supporting the great goal of 
public education--to give all children the opportunity to pursue their 
dreams.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I hope that this effort will be the 
culmination of our long-term efforts to fully fund the Federal share of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Act.
  Last Congress, Senator Jeffords and I twice offered budget amendments 
to fully fund IDEA, and I have offered many measures over the years to 
increase funding for IDEA. Of course, I also have worked closely with 
Senators Kennedy and Harkin on this issue, and I am thrilled to be 
joining today with the many other cosponsors of this bill, Senators 
Murray, Reed, Hagel, Roberts, Collins, and Snowe.
  The Helping Children Succeed by Fully Funding IDEA Act offers 
Congress the opportunity to fulfill our goal of funding 40 percent of 
the cost of educating children with disabilities and to strengthen our 
support for children, parents, and local schools. This act is quite 
simple, it directs the appropriation of funds for IDEA so that we will 
fully fund IDEA by 2007.
  When Congress passed IDEA in 1975, we set a goal of helping States 
meet their constitutional obligation to provide children with 
disabilities a free, appropriate education by paying for 40 percent of 
those costs. We have made great strides toward that goal in the last 
few years, having doubled Federal funding over the past 5 years. 
Nevertheless, we still only provide 15 percent of IDEA costs.
  In my own State of Connecticut, in spite of spending hundreds of 
millions of dollars to fund special education programs, we are facing a 
funding shortfall. In our towns, the situation is even more difficult. 
Too often, our local school districts are struggling to meet the needs 
of their students with disabilities.
  The costs being borne by local communities and school districts are 
rising dramatically. From 1992 through 1997, for example, special 
education costs in Connecticut rose half again as much as did regular 
education costs. Our schools need our help.
  Of course, no one in Connecticut, or in any State or community in our 
country would question the value of ensuring every child the equal 
access to education that he or she is guaranteed by our Constitution. 
The only question is how best to do that, and a large part of the 
answer is in this legislation. This legislation demonstrates that our 
commitment to universal access is matched by our commitment to doing 
everything we can to helping States and schools provide that access.
  And this amendment will help not only our children and schools, it 
will help entire communities, by easing their tax burden. By our 
failure to meet our goal of fully funding IDEA, we force local 
taxpayers--homeowners and small businesspeople--to pay the higher taxes 
that these services require. That is especially a problem in 
Connecticut, where so much of education is paid for through local 
property taxes.
  If we are going to talk about the importance of tax relief for 
average Americans, there are few more important steps we can take than 
passing this legislation. It will go far to alleviate the tax burden 
that these people and businesses bear today.
  Last year, the National Governors' Association wrote me that 
``Governors believe the single most effective step Congress could take 
to help address education needs and priorities, in the context of new 
budget constraints, would be to meet its commitment to fully fund the 
federal portion of IDEA.''
  Over the next 10 years, we're looking at a $2.7 trillion non-Social 
Security, non-Medicare surplus. I think that fully funding IDEA is one 
of the most productive ways that we can use a small part of that 
surplus.
  I ask that my colleagues seize this opportunity and support this 
amendment and choose to help our schools better serve children with 
disabilities, because I am tired of the false dichotomy that many 
people perceive between parents of children without disabilities and 
parents of children with disabilities.
  By fully funding the Federal share of IDEA, and easing the financial 
burden on states and schools, we can stop talking about ``children with 
disabilities'' and ``children without disabilities,'' and start talking 
instead about all children, period.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROBERTS:
  S. 467. A bill to provide grants for States to adopt the Federal 
write-in absentee ballot and to amend the Uniformed and Overseas 
Citizens Absentee Voting Act to require uniform treatment by States of 
Federal write-in absentee ballots; to the Committee on Rules and 
Administation.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 467

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

     SECTION 1. GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Grant Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense, through 
     the Federal Voting Assistance Program, is authorized to award 
     grants to States to enable States to adopt and use--
       (1) the Federal write-in absentee ballot under section 103 
     of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1973ff-2); and
       (2) the absentee ballot mailing envelopes prescribed under 
     section 101 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff);
     in lieu of any State absentee ballot or envelope with respect 
     to ballots of overseas voters for a primary or general 
     election for Federal office.
       (b) Application.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of State, or any other State 
     official responsible for implementing and monitoring 
     elections, of each State desiring a grant under this section 
     shall submit an application to the Secretary of Defense at 
     such time, in such manner, and accompanied by such 
     information as the Secretary of Defense by regulation may 
     reasonably require.
       (2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph 
     (1) shall--
       (A) describe the activities for which assistance under this 
     section is sought; and
       (B) provide such additional assurances as the Secretary of 
     Defense determines to be essential to ensure compliance with 
     the requirements of this section and section 103 of the 
     Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1973ff-2).
       (c) Amount of Grant.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     determine the amount of any grant to be provided under this 
     section in such a manner to ensure that all costs for the 
     purposes for which the grant is awarded will be reimbursed.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     the provisions of this section.

[[Page 2895]]



     SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF FEDERAL WRITE-IN ABSENTEE BALLOT.

       Section 103 of the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee 
     Voting Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff-2) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(g) Requirements for States Receiving Certain Grants.--If 
     a State receives a grant amount with respect to use of 
     Federal write-in absentee ballots under the program 
     administered by the Federal Voting Assistance Program within 
     the Department of Defense, the State shall, in addition to 
     the other requirements of this section--
       ``(1) treat any otherwise valid Federal write-in absentee 
     ballot, that meets the uniform requirements promulgated by 
     the Presidential designee under this title for such ballot, 
     as meeting applicable State law regarding acceptance of 
     absentee ballots; and
       ``(2) accept and count any otherwise valid Federal write-in 
     absentee ballot received by the appropriate State election 
     official on a date that is not later than 10 days after the 
     date of the election to which the ballot refers.
       ``(h) Regulations.--The Presidential designee shall 
     promulgate a regulation--
       ``(1) stating uniform requirements for treatment and 
     acceptance of Federal write-in absentee ballots; and
       ``(2) to provide that the design of any absentee ballot or 
     envelope under this title--
       ``(A) has a marking to distinguish the ballot and envelope 
     as belonging to an overseas voter; and
       ``(B) allows the voter to attest on the ballot that the 
     ballot is cast prior to the date of the election to which the 
     ballot refers.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 468. A bill to designate the Federal building located at 6230 Van 
Nuys Boulevard in Van Nuys, California, as the ``James C. Corman 
Federal Building''; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
to honor the hard work and dedication of the late James C. Corman, an 
esteemed Member of the House of Representatives from California for 20 
years.
  Jim Corman was born in Kansas, and moved to California with his 
mother shortly after his father's death. He served in the Marines 
during World War II. After the war, Jim worked his way through the 
University of California at Los Angeles and the University of Southern 
California Law School. He first held public office in 1957, when he was 
elected to the Los Angeles City Council.
  Jim was first elected to the House in 1960. In 1963, he began serving 
on the Judiciary Committee, which he felt handled the issues that were 
among the most important and relevant to Americans. As a member of the 
Judiciary Committee, he was an influential voice in drafting and 
passing the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964. Jim always considered 
this as the greatest accomplishment of his life.
  In 1968, Jim became a member of the Ways and Means Committee, where 
he devoted his energy to Social Security, tax, and welfare reform. He 
became a crusader for the welfare of senior citizens and the 
disadvantaged members of our society.
  Recognizing that his constituents would have better access to federal 
services if there were a federal building in the San Fernando Valley, 
Jim was responsible for securing funds for its construction. It is only 
fitting that this building be named after the man who considered 
constituent service to be one of his top priorities.
  Mr. President, James C. Corman was a well-respected Member of the 
House. I am pleased to honor his memory by introducing a bill to 
designate the federal building in Van Nuys as the James C. Corman 
Federal Building.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. EDWARDS:
  S. 469. A bill to provide assistance to States for the purpose of 
improving schools through the use of Assistance Teams; to the Committee 
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, today I am introducing the School Support 
and Improvement Act of 2001, a bill designed to help ensure that every 
child in America has access to a quality public school, with good 
teachers, adequate facilities and a safe environment to learn.
  Mr. President, every child deserves and every parent has the right to 
expect a top-notch, quality education. For example:
  Every child should enter 1st grade healthy and prepared to succeed;
  Every child should attend a school that is well-built, well-lit, 
well-equipped and well-connected to our modern world; and
  Every child should be instructed by a well-trained, well-paid and 
qualified teacher.
  But some public schools in America do not meet that standard today. 
Some of our public schools are failing our children and shortchanging 
their future. We need to refocus our energy on turning these schools 
around and getting them back on track. This must be the nation's number 
one priority.
  A quality public school is not a partisan goal; it's not a 
conservative or liberal goal; it's not a big city or rural goal; it's 
not a goal which separates rich from poor.
  It's a simple, common-sense goal we can all agree upon. And if we can 
agree, then we should be able to do something about it.
  The School Support and Improvement Act is one step in achieving this 
common sense goal. The legislation is based on a very important lesson 
we have learned in my home state of North Carolina.
  As many of you know, North Carolina has been at the forefront of the 
effort to reform public education for many years. In fact, President 
Bush's new Education Secretary, Rod Paige, called North Carolina's 
education system ``a model for the Nation.'' The School Support and 
Improvement Act is designed to translate one of the lessons we learned 
in North Carolina to the nationwide education reform effort.
  At the heart of the North Carolina school reform program is a very 
simple idea: immediately after we identify a school that is in trouble, 
we assign a special team of experienced, specially trained educators, 
principals and administrators to go to the school and help them devise 
a plan to turn that school around.
  The team begins with an intensive evaluation of teachers, 
administration and curriculum. Teachers and local school district 
officials work with the Assistance Team to develop a plan tailored to 
the school's needs and designed to improve student performance.
  Assistance Teams have been remarkably successful in North Carolina. 
Since the program started in 1997, Assistance Teams have been assigned 
to 33 schools across North Carolina. Of those 33 schools, 29 have 
improved significantly and are no longer considered low-performing. The 
overall percentage of low-performing schools has also decreased, from 
7.5 percent in the 1996-97 school year to 2.1 percent in the 1999-2000 
school year.
  In short, Assistance Teams are a proven method to get low-performing 
schools back on the path of providing quality education.
  Our bill would accomplish two things: First, it would make the North 
Carolina model of sending Assistance Teams into low performing schools 
a priority throughout the country. Second, it would require that the 
utilization of Assistance Teams be a priority in every States' efforts 
to turn around low performing schools. In order to carry out this task, 
the bill provides additional resources to the States.
  Mr. President, with the right tools, and adequate resources, we can 
begin to put low-performing schools back on the right track. Our 
legislation utilizes a proven model and provides the necessary 
resources while still ensuring flexibility for the state and local 
educational agencies.
  I hope that this legislation will allow other states to benefit from 
the sucessful model we have implemented in North Carolina.
  When the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee considers 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in the coming days, I intend 
to offer this proposal as part of that effort. I ask all of my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation. Thank 
you.
  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:

[[Page 2896]]



                                 S. 469

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``School Support and 
     Improvement Act of 2001.''

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds--
       (1) The percent of low-performing schools in this country 
     is cause for national concern.
       (2) Low-performing schools may not be in a position, or 
     their own, to make the kinds of changes necessary to turn 
     themselves around and improve student achievement.
       (3) The federal government, States, and school districts 
     must collaborate with schools to help them improve to meet 
     the needs of their students.
       (4) Schools must be held accountable for their performance 
     and improvement, but must also be given the tools and 
     resources they need to succeed.

     SEC. 3. FUNDING FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT.

       Each State educational agency shall reserve 5 percent of 
     the amount the State educational agency receives under 
     subpart 2 of part A for fiscal years 2002 through 2008, to 
     carry out the State agency's responsibilities under sections 
     1116 and 1117 (20 USC 6318), including carrying out the State 
     educational agency's statewide assistance and support for 
     local educational agencies, provided that an adequate 
     percentage of that reservation is passed to local educational 
     agencies.

     SEC. 4. PRIORITY FOR SCHOOL ASSISTANCE TEAMS.

       Sec. 1117 (20 USC 6318) is amended--
       (1) in section (a) by adding at the end the following--
       (3) Priority.--In assigning and placing school assistance 
     teams and providing additional support and technical 
     assistance as described in subsection 1117 (c)(1)(B), a State 
     educational agency shall give priority in assigning the State 
     assistance teams under this paragraph to school in which the 
     educational performance of the students is farthest from 
     meeting the State standards as determined by the State--
       (A) first, to schools subject to corrective action under 
     section 1116(c)(5);
       (B) second, to schools identified for school improvement 
     under section 1116(c); and
       (C) third, to schools that have failed to make adequate 
     yearly progress under section 1111 for 1 year and where 
     placement of a State assistance team is appropriate and 
     requested by the local education agency or the school.
       (2) section 1117(c) is amended to read as follows--
       (c) School Assistance Teams.--In order to achieve the 
     purpose described in subsection (a), each State--
       (A) shall give priority in its use of program improvement 
     funds for the establishment of schools assistance teams for 
     assignment to and placement in schools in the State in 
     accordance with 1117(a)(3) and for providing such support as 
     the State educational agency determines to be necessary and 
     available to assure the effectiveness of such teams.
       (i) Composition.--Each school assistance teams shall be 
     composed of persons knowledgeable about successful schoolwide 
     projects, school reform, and improving educational 
     opportunities for low-achieving students including--
       (a) teachers;
       (b) pupil services personnel;
       (c) parents;
       (d) distinguished teachers or principals;
       (e) representatives of institutions of higher education;
       (f) regional educational laboratories or research centers;
       (g) outside consultant groups; or
       (h) other individuals as the state educational agency, in 
     consultation with the local educational agency, may deem 
     appropriate.
       (ii) Functions.--Each school assistance team assigned to a 
     school under this Act shall--
       (a) review and analyze all facets of the school's 
     operation, including the design and operation of the 
     instructional program, and assist the school in developing 
     recommendations for improving student performance in that 
     school;
       (b) collaborate with school staff and the local educational 
     agency serving the school in the design, implementation, and 
     monitoring of a plan that, if fully implemented, can 
     reasonably be expected to provide student performance and 
     help the school meet its goals for improvement, including 
     adequate yearly progress under section 111(b)(2)(B) of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311(b)(2)(B));
       (c) evaluate, at least semiannually, the effectiveness of 
     school personnel assigned to the school, including 
     identifying outstanding teachers and principals, and make 
     findings and recommendations (including the need for 
     additional resources, professional development or 
     compensation) to the school, the local educational agency, 
     and where appropriate, the State educational agency; and
       (d) make additional recommendations as the school 
     implements the plan described in paragraph (b) to the local 
     educational agency and the State educational agency 
     concerning additional assistance and resources that are 
     needed by the school or the assistance teams.
       (iii) Continuation of assistance.--After 1 school year, the 
     school assistance team may recommend that the school support 
     team continue to provide assistance or that the local 
     educational agency or the state educational agency, as 
     appropriate, take alternative actions with regard to the 
     school.
       (B) may provide additional technical assistance and support 
     through such approaches as--
       (i) the designation and use of distinguished teachers and 
     principals, chosen from schools served under this part that 
     have been especially successful in improving academic 
     achievement;
       (ii) providing assistance to the local educational agency 
     or school in the implementation of research-based 
     comprehensive school reform models; and
       (iii) a review process designed to increase the capacity of 
     local educational agencies and schools to develop high-
     quality school improvement plan; and
       (iv) other approaches as the state educational agency may 
     deem appropriate.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BOND:
  S. 470. A bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee 
Voting Act, the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940 to 
ensure that each vote cast by such voter is duly counted, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Support to 
Absentee Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voters Act of 2001. This bill 
ensures that Americans serving overseas, be they the men and women of 
the military who stand guard on foreign shares, or equally deserving 
citizens who serve our country in other venues, will have their vote 
counted. American citizens should not loose their right to vote under 
arbitrary or unfair standards. It is therefore incumbent upon lawmakers 
to ensure their rights are protected.
  Although overseas mail is technically supposed to carry a postmark, 
the reality of the situation is that circumstances in foreign 
countries, or at sea aboard u.S. Navy ships, can result in mail being 
sent without a postmark. Currently several states require a postmark 
for an absentee ballot to be counted and without such a postmark 
citizens are denied their vote through absolutely no fault of their 
own. We saw the damaging affects of this standard in our most recent 
Presidential election.
  My bill provides that states may not refuse to count a ballot 
submitted in an election for a Federal office by an absentee uniformed 
services member or overseas citizen voter on the grounds that the 
ballot was improperly or fraudulently cast ``unless the State finds 
clear and convincing evidence'' of fraud in the preparation or casting 
of the ballot by the voter. Specifically, the bill states under a 
``Clear and Convincing Evidence'' standard, the lack of a witness 
signature, address, postmark, or other identifying information may not 
be considered clear and convincing evidence of fraud, absent any other 
information or evidence. Consequently the mere absence of a postmark 
will not disqualify an overseas citizen from casting his or her vote.
  Mr. President, our most recent election illustrates the clear need 
for change in our voting procedures. Reform is needed. By making 
certain that American's stationed overseas will have their votes 
counted, this bill is one crucial step in that direction. There is need 
for more reform however and I am working on a comprehensive election 
reform bill targeting abusive practices at home. I look forward to 
introducing that legislation next week and working with my colleagues 
towards adoption of all these measures.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. 
        Wellstone, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 471. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 to provide grants for the renovation of schools; to the Committee 
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today we will be introducing the Public 
School Repair and Renovation Act. This legislation will provide grants 
to

[[Page 2897]]

local schools so they can make the repairs to ensure the safety of 
their students. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Bingaman, 
Kennedy, Wellstone, Dodd, and Clinton on this legislation.
  In 1998, the American Society of Civil Engineers issued a Report Card 
for America's Infrastructure which reported serious problems with the 
physical infrastructure in our nation. However, the most alarming 
finding is the failing grade to schools in the United States--the only 
area to receive a failing grade.
  It is a national disgrace that the nicest places our kids see are 
shopping malls, sports arenas, and movie theaters, and the most rundown 
place they see is their school. What signal are we sending them about 
the value we place on them, their education and future?
  Modernizing and repairing our nation's schools is something I've been 
advocating for over a decade now. I secured $100 million in the fiscal 
year 1995 appropriations bill as a down payment on a school 
modernization program and was disappointed when those funds were 
rescinded.
  But we made real progress last year with the passage of a $1.2 
billion initiative to make emergency repairs. That was a bipartisan 
agreement hammered out by Senator Specter and me in negotiations on the 
fiscal year 2001 appropriations bill with Congressman Goodling and the 
White House.
  This was a 1 year authorization and the School Repair and Renovation 
Act will reauthorize this bipartisan plan for 5 years. This program 
provides grants to Local Education Agencies to help them make urgently 
needed repairs and to pay for special education and construction 
related technology expenses.
  Funds will be distributed to the States. States will then distribute 
75 percent of the funds on a competitive basis to local school 
districts to make emergency repairs such as fixing fire code violation, 
repairing the roof or installing new plumbing. The remaining 25 percent 
will be distributed competitively to local school districts to use for 
technology activities related to school renovation or for activities 
authorized under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act.
  The School Repair and Renovation Act is a key component in a two-
prong strategy to modernize our nation's schools.
  In the near future I will join forces with Representatives Johnson 
and Rangel and introduce the America's Better Classrooms Act in the 
Senate to provide tax credits for school construction projects. This 
bipartisan legislation would leverage $1.7 billion in tax credits over 
5 years to pay the interest on $25 billion in school modernization 
bonds.
  I know this approach will work because it mirrors a successful school 
construction demonstration program I started in Iowa in 1997. The Iowa 
demonstration is a two-prong response to our school modernization 
needs. First, we provide grants to local school districts to make 
urgent repairs to remedy fire code violations. Second, grants are made 
to local school districts to subsidize a portion of the cost for a new 
construction project.
  The program has been a big success. During the first 2 years of the 
demonstration, federal funds of $14.7 million supported projects 
totaling $142 million--each federal dollar leveraged $10.33.
  There is a legitimate federal role in helping fix our nation's 
crumbling schools, and we can do so without undermining local control 
of education. This federal role is recognized by President Bush who is 
recommending an expanded use of private activity bonds for school 
construction projects.
  Over the past few years we have had several partisan skirmishes 
related to school construction. This is a new year, a new Congress, and 
a new administration. I look forward to working with my colleagues to 
enact the School Repair and Renovation Act of 2001. I ask unanimous 
consent that a copy of the report card to which I referred be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

              1998 REPORT CARD FOR AMERICA's INFRASTRUCTURE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Subject            Grade                  Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roads..................       D-   More than half (59 percent) of our
                                    roadways are in poor, mediocre or
                                    fair condition. More than 70 percent
                                    of peak-hour traffic occurs in
                                    congested conditions. It will cost
                                    $263 billion to eliminate the
                                    backlog of needs and maintain repair
                                    levels. Another $94 billion is
                                    needed for modest improvement--a
                                    $357 billion total.
Bridges................         C- Nearly one of every three bridges
                                    (31.4 percent) is rated structurally
                                    deficient or functionally obsolete.
                                    It will require $80 billion to
                                    eliminate the current backlog of
                                    bridge deficiencies and maintain
                                    repair levels.
Mass Transit...........         C  Twenty percent of buses, 23 percent
                                    of rail vehicles, and 38 percent of
                                    rural and specialized vehicles are
                                    in deficient condition. Twenty-one
                                    percent of rail track requires
                                    improvement. Forty-eight percent of
                                    rail maintenance buildings, 65
                                    percent of all rail yards and 46
                                    percent of signals and communication
                                    equipment are in fair or poor
                                    condition. The investment needed to
                                    maintain conditions is $39 billion.
                                    It would take up to $72 billion to
                                    improve conditions.
Aviation...............         C- There are 22 airports that are
                                    seriously congested. Passenger
                                    enplanements are expected to climb
                                    3.9 percent annually to 827.1
                                    million in 2008. At current
                                    capacity, this growth will lead to
                                    gridlock by 2004 or 2005. Estimates
                                    for capital investment needs range
                                    from $40-60 billion in the next five
                                    years to meet design requirements
                                    and expand capacity to meet demand.
Schools................        F   One-third of all schools need
                                    extensive repair or replacement.
                                    Nearly 60 percent of schools have at
                                    least one major building problem,
                                    and more than half have inadequate
                                    environmental conditions. Forty-six
                                    percent lack basic wiring to support
                                    computer systems. It will cost about
                                    $112 billion to repair, renovate and
                                    modernize our schools Another $60
                                    billion in new construction is
                                    needed to accommodate the 3 million
                                    new students expected in the next
                                    decade.
Drinking Water.........        D   More than 16,000 community water
                                    systems (29 percent) did not comply
                                    with the Safe Drinking Water Act
                                    standards in 1993. The total
                                    infrastructure need remains large--
                                    $138.4 billion. More than $76.8
                                    billion of that is needed right now
                                    to protect public health.
Wastewater.............       D+   Today, 60 percent of our rivers and
                                    lakes are fishable and swimmable.
                                    There remain an estimated 300,000 to
                                    400.000 contaminated groundwater
                                    sites. America needs to invest
                                    roughly $140 billion over the next
                                    20 years in its wastewater treatment
                                    systems. An additional 2,000 plants
                                    may be necessary by the year 2016.
Dams...................        D   There are 2,100 regulated dams that
                                    are considered unsafe. Every state
                                    has at least one high-hazard dam,
                                    which upon failure would cause
                                    significant loss of life and
                                    property. There were more than 200
                                    documented dam failures across the
                                    nation in the past few years. It
                                    would cost about $1 billion to
                                    rehabilitate documented unsafe dams.
Solid Waste............         C- Totals non-hazardous municipal solid
                                    waste will increase from 208 to 218
                                    million tons annually by the year
                                    2000, even though the per capita
                                    waste generation rate will decrease
                                    from 1,606 to 1,570 pounds per
                                    person per year. Total expenditures
                                    for managing non-hazardous municipal
                                    solid waste in 1991 were $18 billion
                                    and are expected to reach $75
                                    billion by the year 2000.
Hazardous Waste........       D-   More than 530 million tons of
                                    municipal and industrial hazardous
                                    waste is generated in the U.S. each
                                    year. Since 1980, only 423 (32
                                    percent) of the 1,200 Superfund
                                    sites on the National Priorities
                                    List have been cleaned up. The NPL
                                    is expected to grow to 2,000 in the
                                    next several years. The price tag
                                    for Superfund and related clean up
                                    programs is an estimated $750
                                    billion and could rise to $1
                                    trillion over the next 30 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
America's Infrastructure G.P.A. = D. Total Investment Needs = $1.3
  Trillion
 
A = Exception
B = Good
C = Mediocre
D = Poor
F = Indequate
 
Each category was evaluated on the basis of condition and performance,
  capacity vs. need, and funding vs. need.

  

                          ____________________