[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3894-3900]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. HATCH:
  S. 560. A bill for the relief of Rita Mirembe Revell (a.k.a. Margaret 
Rita Mirembe); to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a private relief 
bill for Rita Mirembe Revell. Rita is a 15-year-old child from Uganda 
who was brought to this country in 1994. When Rita was 18 months old 
she was left with the Daughters of Charity Society, a Catholic 
organization in Kampala, Uganda. Rita was an orphan, abandoned with no 
known family.
  Rita has resided in the United States under a student visa since 
1994. As an orphan the only parents she has ever known are her American 
guardians, who have sponsored Rita since she was three years old. They 
want very much to adopt Rita, but they have been unable to get around 
the mess of international red tape. The Ugandan Government has very 
strict policies concerning adoption by foreign nationals.

[[Page 3895]]

Now as Rita approaches her 16th birthday she is in danger of being 
deported. Rita has formed an intimate bond with her American parents, 
who hope to complete the adoption as soon as possible. Papers for 
adoption have already been filed, while there are bureaucratic 
difficulties, the adoption is not contested by any party.



  Understandably, the family is concerned that Rita will be deported 
before her adoption is finalized. This bill simply gives Rita permanent 
residency so that she might remain with the only parents she has ever 
known while her adoption becomes final. Other immigration scenarios 
would require Rita to return to an unsafe country for an unknown period 
of time. She has no known family in Uganda. Her new life is in 
California where she was recently admitted to Loretto High School, an 
outstanding college preparatory high school.
  This bill gives Rita permanent resident status, which will allow her 
to remain in the country while the adoption process continues. It 
allows Rita to stay with her American parents in the country that she 
now calls home. The bill also offers the comfort of certainty for her 
parents.
  I hope that we can move quickly to grant this relief.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS:
  S. 561. A bill to provide that the same health insurance premium 
conversion arrangements afforded to Federal employees be made available 
to Federal annuitants and members and retired members of the uniformed 
services; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
extend to Federal retirees and both active and retired military 
personnel the same health insurance premium conversion benefits allowed 
to current civilian Federal employees. This legislation directs the 
Office of Personnel Management to establish a system allowing those who 
participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, FEHBP, to 
pay their health insurance premiums from pre-tax income.
  The practice of allowing health care participants to use pre-tax 
income to pay their health insurance premiums is often used in the 
private sector as a way of recognizing the importance of adequate, 
affordable health insurance. This system is called premium conversion. 
Last year, the Office of Personnel Management recognized this concept 
by establishing a plan to allow most employees of the executive, 
legislative and judicial branches to participate in premium conversion.
  Many Federal retirees also participate in the FEHBP program and as a 
matter of fairness should be extended the opportunity to participate in 
premium conversion. In addition, the military currently has a separate 
health care system, but it is exploring offering health benefits under 
FEHBP, and therefore military employees or retirees who do participate 
in FEHBP should also be allowed premium conversion.
  I have heard from Federal retirees in Maine who have pointed out the 
unfairness of not including retired Federal employees in the premium 
conversion system. This legislation will address this inequity.
  I urge my colleagues to review and support this important 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Dodd, Mr. 
        Graham, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Reed, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. 
        Corzine, Mr. Durbin, and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 562. A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act with 
respect to the record of admission for permanent residence in the case 
of certain aliens; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. REID, Mr. President, family reunification is the cornerstone of 
our immigration policy. It is truly one of the most visible areas in 
government policy in which we support and strengthen family values.
  Family unification translates into strong families and strong 
families build strong communities. For that reason I am introducing the 
Working Families Registry Act.
  This bill would allow immigrants who have been working and raising 
families in the country since and before 1986 to apply for permanent 
residence.
  In my home State of Nevada I have met with people who every day fear 
being deported and separated from their families. They are married to 
Americans, have American children and have worked and been paying taxes 
for many years. They help and do not harm our industry and our economy.
  A change in the date of registry would help these families. This bill 
would solve the problem of immigrants who have been paying taxes, who 
have feared being deported and separated from their families.
  The Working Families Registry Act would update a provision of 
immigration law known as ``registry.''
  The registry provision originated in a 1929 law and in 1958 that law 
became available to foreigners who had entered the country illegally or 
who had overstayed. This criteria remains today and sets a required 
date for which continuous residence must be shown in order to qualify 
for permanent U.S. residency. The date of registry currently sits at 
1972, and was last adjusted in 1986. My legislation would update the 
date of registry from 1972 to 1986. A change in the date of registry is 
necessary.
  First, it would address the uncertainty of taxpaying immigrants who 
would qualify for residence under this bill. Many of these immigrants 
live in fear of being separated from their families, having their 
worker's permits stripped and their residency status revoked.
  Secondly, the legislation would help strengthen the immigrant 
contributions to our national economy, tax base, and social fabric. The 
guaranteed benefits of residence (e.g., access to basic health care and 
education) provide for a more productive and effective workforce.
  Third, we recognize today, as so many legislators did in the past 
that immigrants who have remained in the country for an extended period 
of time are highly unlikely to leave.
  Fourth, if an update of the registry is not achieved, the validity of 
this concept will be meaningless when this issue emerges in the future.
  Finally, Americans care about this issue.
  A recent poll conducted by the National Immigration Forum found that 
55 percent of Americans strongly favor legalizing a limited number of 
undocumented immigrants. That is, those immigrants who have been 
raising their families and paying their taxes--and who can prove they 
have been in the United States for more than 5 years.
  I believe it is in America's interest to pass The Working Families 
Registry Act.
  Immigrants' relationships with the United States are predicated by 
the recognition of America's greatness. And, keeping families together, 
keeps America great.
  Please join my efforts to make this bill law, as we continue to seek 
ways to keep America's working families together.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 564. A bill to amend section 1713 of title 38, United States Code, 
to provide continuing eligibility for medical care under that section 
for individuals who become eligible for hospital insurance benefit 
under part A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act by turning 65; 
to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am proud to be the author of the 
CHAMPVA for Life Act of 2001.
  Last year, Congress finally enacted legislation to restore the 
promise of providing lifetime health care to our military retirees. 
TRICARE for Life, as it is known, is long overdue. However, an equally 
worthy group has been left out of the reform.
  The Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, CHAMPVA, provides health care coverage to several categories 
of individuals who have paid dearly for that right: dependents of 
veterans who have been rated by VA as having a

[[Page 3896]]

total and permanent disability; survivors of veterans who died from VA-
rated service-connected conditions; and survivors of servicemembers who 
died in the line of duty. As such, CHAMPVA provides a measure of 
security to a group of persons who have indisputably given a great deal 
to our country.
  CHAMPVA is intended to serve as a safety net for dependents and 
survivors of severely disabled veterans who, because of their 
disabilities, were unable to provide health insurance benefits to their 
families through employment. The safety net mission of CHAMPVA has not 
changed, but this law must change, since under current law, CHAMPVA 
beneficiaries lose their eligibility for coverage when they turn 65.
  The TRICARE for Life law passed last year specifically allows 
military retirees and their dependents to remain in the TRICARE program 
after they turn age 65, as long as they are enrolled with Part B of 
Medicare. TRICARE will cover those expenses not covered under Medicare. 
It also provides for retail and mail-order pharmaceutical coverage for 
Medicare-eligible military retirees.
  There is no doubt that TRICARE and CHAMPVA beneficiaries should 
retain similar eligibility for health care coverage. What TRICARE does 
for the families of military retirees should be no less readily 
available to the survivors and dependents of severely disabled veterans 
and those service-members who died in the line of duty. Simple justice 
and equity demand this. Just last week, I received a letter from a 
constituent from Nutter Fort, WV, that hammered home this very point. 
She asked in her letter, ``Why aren't the CHAMPVA beneficiaries offered 
the same program recently approved for those on TRICARE who are now 
eligible for Medicare?''
  Indeed, title 38 of the United States Code reflects this view by 
requiring the Secretary to provide medical care ``in the same or 
similar manner and subject to the same or similar limitations as 
medical care furnished to certain dependents and survivors of active 
duty and retired members of the Armed Forces.'' And up until enactment 
of the new, highly valued TRICARE for Life provisions just last fall, 
the two programs were, indeed, similar.
  An argument could be made that since TRICARE was modified to remove 
the limitation on eligibility, legislation is not necessary to equate 
the two programs. However, VA has not yet embraced CHAMPVA for Life.
  The bill simply clarifies that the CHAMPVA and TRICARE programs 
should continue to operate in a similar manner, with similar 
eligibility. This would mean that Medicare-eligible CHAMPVA 
beneficiaries who enroll in Part B of Medicare would retain secondary 
CHAMPVA coverage, and beneficiaries would receive the same pharmacy 
benefit as CHAMPVA beneficiaries who are under age 65.
  The failure of Congress to enact prescription drug coverage under 
Medicare only underscores the need to enact this CHAMPVA reform. 
However serious a gap it was for Medicare to lack prescription drug 
benefit in 1965, incredible advances in drug therapy, combined with 
staggering inflation in prescription drug costs, have made the need for 
affordable prescription drug coverage even more important today. 
CHAMPVA beneficiaries who have sacrificed so much already should not be 
forced to sacrifice anything more to purchase needed prescription 
drugs.
  Nothing brings this closer to home for me than another letter I 
received recently, this one from a Korean War veteran and his wife in 
Alderson, WV. They were upset to learn that when the wife turned 65, 
she lost all of her CHAMPVA benefits. As a result, she was forced to 
pay more than $300 per month for her diabetes and heart medications, in 
addition to all the other new costs for care not covered by Medicare. 
With Social Security and disability compensation as their only income, 
this couple is struggling to absorb this enormous new expense in their 
modest budget. The husband, a 100-percent disabled veteran, wrote 
poignantly to me, ``. . . it would help us out so much if CHAMPVA would 
continue to cover my wife's medical care.''
  In closing, I thank the Gold Star Wives Association for their 
dedication and for bringing this issue to my attention. We must never 
forget that the costs of military service are borne not only by the 
servicemember alone, but by their families as well.
  I hope the Committee on Veterans' Affairs will expedite passage of 
this bill out of committee. CHAMPVA beneficiaries are depending upon 
it.
  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. 564

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

     SECTION 1. CONTINUING ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS UNDER CHAMPVA 
                   OF INDIVIDUALS WHO BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR HOSPITAL 
                   INSURANCE BENEFITS UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY 
                   ACT BY TURNING 65.

       Section 1713(d) of title 38, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(2)'' before ``Notwithstanding''; and
       (2) by inserting before paragraph (2), as designated by 
     paragraph (1) of this section, the following new paragraph 
     (1):
       ``(1) Notwithstanding section 1086(d)(1) of title 10 or any 
     other provision of law, an individual eligible for medical 
     care under this section who is also entitled to hospital 
     insurance benefits under part A of title XVIII of the Social 
     Security Act by reason of being 65 years of age or older 
     shall not lose eligibility for medical care under this 
     section by virtue of entitlement to such hospital insurance 
     benefits.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Dayton, 
        Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 565. A bill to establish the Commission Voting Rights and 
Procedures to study and make recommendations regarding election 
technology, voting, election administration, to establish a grant 
program under which the Office of Justice Programs and the Civil Rights 
Division of the Department of Justice shall provide assistance to 
States and localities in improving election technology and the 
administration of Federal elections, to require States to meet uniform 
and nondiscriminatory election technology and administration 
requirements for the 2004 Federal elections, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
address some of the glaring problems that occurred in the 2000 
elections with regard to technology and election administration. The 
Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act of 2001, and companion 
legislation introduced in the House by Congressman John Conyers, will 
provided much needed guidance, and funds, to state and local election 
officials to ensure that Federal elections are conducted in a manner 
that encourages participation and facilitates voting by all Americans 
in a nondiscriminatory manner.
  The right to vote is the cornerstone right in a Democracy. In the 
words of Thomas Paine, it is ``the primary right by which other rights 
are protected.'' Thirty-six years ago last week, on March 15, 1965, 
President Lyndon Johnson convened a Joint Session of Congress to call 
for passage of what ultimately became the Voting Rights Act. President 
Johnson spoke plainly and forcefully that evening. ``All Americans,'' 
he said, ``must have the right to vote. And we are going to give them 
that right. All Americans must have the privileges of citizenship 
regardless of race. And they are going to have those privileges of 
citizenship regardless of race.''
  Yet the sad message of this last election is that the privileges of 
citizenship have yet to be fully guaranteed to all Americans. Nor are 
the barriers to exercising this fundamental right limited to race. 
Inaccessible polling places and visual ballots disenfranchised the 
disabled and blind across this country. Complicated instructions and a 
lack of trained personnel discouraged language minorities and the 
elderly from fully exercising their right to vote. And even if voters 
were able to get to the polling

[[Page 3897]]

place, read the ballot and cast it, antiquated technology and 
insufficient machinery denied Americans of all races, languages, and 
physical abilities the right to have their vote counted. In short, what 
happened last November set off alarms across this Nation that threaten 
to undermine the integrity of our system of Democracy.
  The fact is, there is a fundamental flaw in our Federal elections 
system--and that flaw is the lack of federal direction, leadership, and 
resources provided to the States and localities to meet their 
responsibility as the administrators of Federal elections. What we 
learned last November is that it is not good enough to guarantee the 
right to vote, if procedures and technology prevent individuals from 
exercising that right. And it will take more than just the latest 
technology, or a new ``mouse-trap'' to fix the problem.
  The legislation Congressman Conyers and I are introducing--The Equal 
Protection of Voting Rights Act of 2001--is intended to secure the 
rights of all Americans to participate in our Democracy, by 
establishing 3 simple national requirements for Federal elections: (1) 
that voting systems and technology meet national standards; (2) that 
states provide for provisional voting; and (3) that states provide 
sample ballots and voting instructions to voters prior to election day. 
These requirements must be implemented by the 2004 federal elections, 
and this legislation provides funding to States and localities to fund 
the costs of implementing these requirements.
  This legislation also creates a temporary Commission to study 
numerous electin reform issues such election systems and ballot 
designs, access for the disabled, voter intimidation, access for absent 
military and overseas voters, the feasibility of a national holiday, 
and alternative methods of voting to facilitate participation. Within 1 
year of enactment, the Commission will adopt a final report, along with 
recommendations for best practices in the areas of convenient, 
accessible, nondiscriminatory election systems that accommodate voters 
with disabilities, the blind, and the limited-English speaking. The 
Commission will also make recommendations for how the Federal 
government, on an ongoing basis, can best provide assistance to State 
and local governments. Finally, the Commission will issue 
recommendations for best practices which will increase voter 
registration, the accuracy of voter rolls, and will improve voter 
education and the training of election personnel and volunteers.
  Finally, my legislation provides grant money, administered by the 
Department of Justice, to states and localities to implement the 3 
national requirements for the 2004 and subsequent elections. In order 
to encourage the States and localities to act to improve voting systems 
and election administration procedures prior to the 2004 elections, the 
bill allows States and localities to apply for grants to replace voting 
equipment and technology and make it accessible to those with 
disabilities, the blind, and those with limited-English proficiency, to 
implement new administrative procedures to increase participation and 
reduce disenfranchisement of minorities; to educate voters and train 
election personnel and volunteers; and to implement recommendations of 
the Commission. To be eligible for grant funds, a State must submit a 
plan providing for uniform, nondiscriminatory voting systems that 
ensure accessibility for all voters; provides for the accuracy of 
voting records; and provides for voter education and personnel 
training.
  The Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act of 2001 is endorsed by the 
following organizations: The National Association for the Advancement 
of Colored People (NAACP); the AFL-CIO; The National Federation of the 
Blind; the National Council of La Raza; the American Civil Liberties 
Union; and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
  The issues highlighted in the last election are not a Democratic or a 
Republican problem. They are an American problem and the solutions to 
these problems must be, appropriately, nonpartisan to succeed.
  The Committee on Rules and Administration, on which I serve as 
Ranking Member, has already held one day of hearings on the topic of 
Election Reform. What became clear from those hearings is that there is 
a bipartisan recognition that States and localities need assistance to 
enable them to efficiently, and effectively, administer Federal 
elections on a nondiscriminatory basis. I would submit that such 
assistance needs to take the form of both Federal election requirements 
for nondiscriminatory, inclusive voting systems, provisional voting, 
and sample ballot and voting instructions, as well as the financial 
resources to implement such requirements.
  I stand ready to work with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
fashion bipartisan legislation to ensure that all citizens can 
participate in this Democracy. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this 
legislation and look forward to additional hearings in the Rules 
Committee on this and other election reform proposals.
  I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section analysis of the 
bill be included in the Record following my written remarks.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

Section-by-Section Analysis of Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act of 
                                  2001


   title i--establishment of commission on voting rights & procedures

       Sec. 101.--Establishment of the Commission.
       Sec. 102.--Membership of the Commission.
       Number and Appointment.--the Commission is composed of 12 
     members, appointed for the life of the Commission, with 6 
     appointed by the President and 3 appointed by the Senate 
     Minority Member (unless of the same party as the President, 
     and then by the Senate Majority Leader), and 3 appointed by 
     the House Minority Leader (unless of the same party as the 
     President, and then by the House Majority Leader); the 
     Chairperson and Vice Chairperson are elected by the 
     Commission and may not be affiliated with the same political 
     party; all meetings shall be at the call of the chair and a 
     majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a 
     quorum, but a lesser number may hold hearings.
       Sec. 103.--Duties of the Commission.
       (a) Study.--The Commission shall conduct a study of the 
     following issues: election technology and systems; design/
     uniformity of ballots; access to ballots and polling places 
     for the disabled/visually impaired/limited-English speakers; 
     capacity of voting systems/sufficiency of the number of 
     machines to serve voters; voter registration and standards 
     for reenfranchisement; alternative voting methods (internet); 
     voter intimidation; accuracy of voting procedures and 
     technology; voter/poll worker education and training; access 
     for overseas and military voters; feasibility of establishing 
     a Federal or state holiday; feasibility of establishing 
     modified polling hours; and appropriate role for the Federal 
     government to provide assistance to states & localities and 
     whether a new agency is needed.
       (b) Recommendations.--The Commission shall develop 
     recommendations of best practices for:
       (1) Voting and election administration which: are 
     nondiscriminatory and accommodate the disabled/vision 
     impaired/limited-English speaking; yield the broadest 
     participation; and produce accurate results.;
       (2) assistance in Federal elections, which provide the best 
     method for the Federal government to provide on-going, 
     permanent assistance; whether an existing or new Federal 
     agency is required; and
       (3) voter participation in Federal elections to increase 
     voter registration; increase accuracy of voter rolls and 
     participation; to improve voter education; and to improve 
     training of election personnel and volunteers.
       (c) Reports.--a final report and recommendations are due 1 
     year after enactment; interim reports are authorized; 
     recommendations must be adopted by majority vote of the 
     Commission with minority opinions included in the report.
       Sec. 104.--Powers of the Commission.
       The Commission may: hold hearings/issue subpoenas/pay 
     witnesses/accept gifts; and secure administrative support and 
     information from Federal agencies upon joint request of the 
     chair and vice-chair.
       Sec. 105.--Commission Personnel Matters.
       The Commission members, who are not Federal employees, are 
     compensated at the rate for level IV, Executive Schedule; are 
     allowed travel expenses, as per Title 5; may make use of 
     detailed employees and procure consultant services on the 
     joint action of the chair and vice-chair; and may appoint/
     terminate an executive director on the joint action of the 
     chair and vice-chair.

[[Page 3898]]

       Sec. 106.--Termination of the Commission.
       The Commission terminates within 45 days of issuance of the 
     final report and recommendations.
       Sec. 107.--Authorization of Appropriations for the 
     Commission.
       Such sums as are necessary to carry out the title are 
     authorized to remain available, without fiscal year 
     limitation, until expended.

  Title II--Election Technology and Administration Improvement Grant 
                                Program

       Sec. 201.--Establishment of Grant Program.
       (a) In General--the Attorney General, in consultation with 
     the Federal Election Commission, make grants to States and 
     localities.
       (b) Action Through the Office of Justice Programs and 
     Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights--The Attorney 
     General acts through the Office of Justice Programs and the 
     Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.
       Sec. 202.--Authorized Activities.
       (a) In General.--States and localities may use grant 
     payments:
       (1) to improve, acquire, or replace voting equipment or 
     technology and improve the accessibility of polling places 
     for persons with disabilities, including nonvisual access for 
     voters with visual impairments and assistance to voters with 
     limited English proficiency;
       (2) to implement new election administration procedures to 
     increase participation and reduce disenfranchisement, 
     including ``same-day'' voter registration;
       (3) to educate voters and train election personnel;
       (4) to implement the final recommendations of the 
     Commission.
       (b) Requirements for Election Technology and 
     Administration.--States and localities may use grant 
     payments:
       (1) to implement the national voting system requirements 
     under 301(a);
       (2) to implement the national provisional voting 
     requirements under 301(b);
       (3) to implement the national sample ballot requirements 
     under 301(c).
       Sec. 203.--General Policies and Criteria for the Approval 
     of Applications of States and Localities; Requirements of 
     State Plans.
       (a) General Policies.--The Attorney General, in 
     consultation with the Federal Election Administration, 
     establishes general policies for grant applications.
       (b) Criteria.--The Attorney General establishes criteria 
     for State plans; state plans must include each of the 
     following:
       (A) uniform nondiscriminatory voting standards within the 
     State for election administration and technology that--
       (i) meet the national requirements for voting systems, 
     provisional voting, and sample ballots;
       (ii) provide access for the disabled, the vision impaired, 
     and voters of limited English proficiency;
       (iii) provide for ease and convenience of voting, including 
     accuracy, non-intimidation, and non-discrimination;
       (iv) ensure compliance with the Voting Accessibility for 
     the Elderly and Handicapped Act;
       (v) ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act;
       (vi) ensure compliance with the National Voter Registration 
     Act;
       (vii) ensure access for overseas and absent military 
     voters;
       (B) provide for accuracy of records and prevent purging 
     that will result in legal voters being eliminated;
       (C) provide for voter education and election worker 
     training;
       (D) provide an effective means of notifying voters of their 
     rights; and
       (E) provide a timetable for meeting the elements of the 
     plan.
       Sec. 204.--Submission of Application of States and 
     Localities.
       (a) Submission of Applications by States.--The chief 
     executive office of the State submits the grant application 
     along with the state plan, which is developed in consultation 
     with State and local election officials and must make 
     available to the public for review and comment before 
     submission.
       (b) Submission of Applications by Localities.--If a State 
     has submitted an application under (a), a locality may submit 
     a grant application that is consistent with the State plan, 
     does not duplicate funding received under the State 
     application.
       Sec. 205.--Approval of Applications of States and 
     Localities.
       (a) Approval of State Applications.--A State plan received 
     by the Attorney General must be published in the Federal 
     Register and subject to public comments; 30 days after 
     publication, taking into consideration any comments received, 
     the Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal 
     Election Commission, approves or disapproves the State plan.
       (a) Approval of Applications of Localities.--If the 
     Attorney General approves the application of a State, then 
     the Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal 
     Election Commission, can approve an application by a locality 
     of that State.
       Sec. 206.--Federal Matching Funds.
       The Attorney General shall pay the Federal share of grants; 
     Federal Share.--in general, the Federal share is 80%, but the 
     Attorney General may waive that amount and increase the 
     Federal share; Incentive for Early Action.--the Federal share 
     shall be 90% for applications received by March 1, 2002; and 
     Reimbursement for Cost of Meeting Requirements.--100% for 
     costs incurred to meet the national requirements under Title 
     III.
       Sec. 207.--Audits and Examinations of States and 
     Localities.
       The Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal 
     Election Commission, shall specify what records grant 
     recipients must maintain in order to allow for audits.
       Sec. 208.--Reports to Congress and the Attorney General.
       The Attorney General submits reports to the Congress 
     annually starting in 2003 describing the activities funded by 
     the grants and any recommendations for legislative or 
     administrative action and grant recipients shall submit any 
     reports to the Attorney General as the Attorney General 
     considers appropriate.
       Sec. 209.--Definitions of State and Locality.
       The term ``State'' refers to the several States, the 
     District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 
     American Samoa, Guam and the United States Virgin Islands' 
     the term ``locality'' means a political subdivision of a 
     State.
       Sec. 210.--Authorization of Appropriations.
       (a) Authorization.--There are authorized to the Department 
     of Justice and the Federal Election Commission for FY 2002, 
     2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006, such sums as are necessary for 
     awarding grants and paying administrative expenses and 
     carrying out the provisions of the Act.
       (b) Limitation.--administrative expenses may not exceed 
     more than 1% of funds.
       (c) Supplemental Appropriations.--Supplemental 
     appropriations for FY 2001 are authorized.

    Title III--Requirements for Election Technology & Administration

       Sec. 301.--Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Requirements for 
     election Technology and Administration.
       (a) Voting Systems.--Each voting system used in a Federal 
     election shall meet the following requirements:
       (1) shall permit the voter to verify and correct votes 
     selected before the ballot is cast and tabulated;
       (2) shall notify the voter of the effects of casting more 
     than 1 vote for a candidate [over votes] and allow the voter 
     to correct the ballot before it is cast and tabulated;
       (3) shall notify the voter of the effects of not voting for 
     all of the candidates [under votes] and allow the voter to 
     correct the ballot before it is cast and tabulated;
       (4) shall produce an audit trail;
       (5) shall be accessible for individuals with disabilities 
     and other individuals with special needs, including providing 
     nonvisual access for the blind and visually impaired, which 
     provides the same opportunity for access and participation 
     (including privacy and independence) as for other voters, and 
     provides alternative language accessibility for voters with 
     limited English proficiency; and
       (6) has an error rate in counting and tabulating ballots 
     that does not exceed the current error rate standards 
     established by the Voting systems Standards of the Office of 
     Election Administration of the Federal Elections 
     Administration.
       (b) Provisional Voting.--Each State must provide for 
     provisional voting in a Federal election so that if the name 
     of a voter who declares to be a registered eligible voter 
     does not appear on the official list, or if it is otherwise 
     asserted that the individual is not eligible to vote--
       (1) an election official shall notify the individual that 
     the voter may cast a provisional ballot;
       (2) the individual shall be permitted to cast a vote upon 
     written affirmation, before an election official, by the 
     individual that he/she is eligible to vote;
       (3) an election official shall transfer the ballot to the 
     appropriate State or local official for prompt verification;
       (4) if the appropriate State or local official verifies the 
     affirmation, the vote shall be tabulated; and
       (5) the individual shall be notified in writing of the 
     final disposition of the declaration and treatment of the 
     vote.
       (c) Sample Ballot.--(1) Not later than 10 days before a 
     Federal election, the appropriate election official shall 
     mail a sample version of the ballot to each registered voter, 
     along with:
       (A) information on the date of the election and the polling 
     hours;
       (B) instructions on how to cast a vote on the ballot; and
       (C) general information on voting rights under Federal and 
     applicable State laws and instructions on how to effectuate 
     those rights
       (2) Publication and Posting.--not later than 10 days before 
     a Federal election, the sample ballot which is mailed to each 
     voter shall be published in a newspaper of general 
     circulation and posted publicly at each polling place.
       Sec. 302.--Guidelines and Technical Specifications.
       (a) Voting Systems Requirement Specifications.--The Office 
     of Election Administration of the Federal Election Commission 
     shall develop national Voting Systems Specifications with 
     respect to the voting systems requirement under 301.

[[Page 3899]]

       (b) Provisional Voting Guidelines.--The Civil Rights 
     Division of the Department of Justice shall develop initial 
     guidelines with respect to the provisional voting requirement 
     under 301.
       (c) Sample Ballot Guidelines.--The Civil Rights Division of 
     the Department of Justice shall develop initial guidelines 
     with respect to the sample ballot requirement under 301.
       Sec. 303--Requiring States to Meet Requirements.
       (a) In General.--a State or locality must meet the 
     requirements for voting systems, provisional voting and 
     sample ballots with respect to the regularly scheduled 
     election for Federal office held in the State in 2004, except 
     that if guidelines and technical specifications have not been 
     published, such guidelines and specifications do not have to 
     be complied with until published.
       (b) Treatment of Activities Relating to Voting Systems 
     Under Grant Program.--If a State has received grant funds to 
     purchase or modify voting systems in accordance with a state 
     plan, the State shall be deemed to meet the requirement of 
     section 301(a).
       Sec. 304.--Enforcement by Attorney General.
       The Attorney General may bring a civil action for 
     appropriate relief (including declaratory or injunctive 
     relief) as may be necessary to carry out this title.

                        Title IV--Miscellaneous

       Sec. 401.--Relationship to Other Laws.
       (a) In General.--nothing in this Act may be construed to 
     authorize or require conduct prohibited under the following 
     laws, or supersede, restrict, or limit such laws:
       (1) The National Voter Registration Act of 1993;
       (2) The Voting Rights Act of 1965;
       (3) The Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and 
     Handicapped Act;
       (4) The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting 
     Act;
       (5) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
       (b) No Effect on Preclearance or Other Requirements Under 
     Voting Rights Act.--the approval by the Attorney General of a 
     State's grant application shall not be considered to have any 
     effect on requirements for preclearance under section 5 of 
     the Voting Rights Act of 1965 or any other requirements of 
     such Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HOLLINGS:
  S. 566. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a 10 percent individual income tax rate for taxable years beginning in 
2001 and a payroll tax credit for those taxpayers who have no income 
tax liability in 2001; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I recently introduced, S. Con. Res. 20, 
a one-year budget proposal which included instructions for a tax cut if 
either: (1) a true surplus materializes, or (2) we enter a recession. 
It is now apparent the economy is on a downturn and there is no good 
reason to await action. That is why I am introducing a one-year tax cut 
of approximately $95 billion to stimulate the economy. Any tax cut 
designed for economic stimulus should be about one percent of GDP. The 
tax cut will reduce income taxes and payroll taxes as follows:
  The 15 percent tax rate will be reduced to 10 percent for the 
following brackets:
  $0-20,000 for couples;
  $0-16,000 for heads of households;
  $0-10,000 for singles or married filing separately.
  The 25 million taxpayers who pay payroll taxes but do not qualify for 
income tax cuts will receive up to $500 in payroll tax cuts.
  This plan reaches approximately 120 million taxpayers, thus providing 
relief to more people than any other proposal to date. If passed, this 
proposal will provide immediate relief by sending a check to these 120 
million taxpayers by July 1, 2001.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SESSIONS:
  S. 567. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
capital gain treatment under section 631(b) of such Code for outright 
sales of timber by landowners; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
which will simplify and update a provision of the tax code that affects 
the sale of timber. It is both a simplification measure and a fairness 
measure. I call it the Timber Tax Simplification Act.
  Under current law, landowners that are occasional sellers of timber 
are often classified by the Internal Revenue Service as ``dealers.'' As 
a result, the small landowner is forced to choose, because of the tax 
code, between two different methods of selling their timber. The first 
method, ``lump sum'' sales, provides for good business practice but is 
subject to a high income tax. The second method, ``pay-as-cut'' sales, 
allows for lower capital gains tax treatment, but often results in an 
under-realization of the fair value of the contract. Why, one might 
ask, do these conflicting incentives exist for our nation's timber 
growers?
  Earlier in this century, outright, or ``lump sum'', sales on a cash 
in advance, sealed basis, were associated with a ``cut and run'' 
mentality that did not promote good forest management. ``Pay-as-cut 
sales'', however, in which a timber owner is only paid for timber that 
is actually harvested, were associated with ``enlightened'' resource 
management. Consequently, in 1943, Congress, in an effort to provide an 
incentive for improved forest management, passed legislation that 
allowed capital gains treatment under 631(b) of the IRS Code for pay-
as-cut sales, leaving lump-sum sales to pay the much higher rate of 
income tax. It is said that President Roosevelt opposed the bill and 
almost vetoed it.
  Today, however, Section 631(b), like so many provisions in the IRS 
Code, is outdated. Forest management practices are much different from 
what they were in 1943 and lump-sum sales are no longer associated with 
poor forest management. And, while there are occasional special 
situations where other methods may be more appropriate, most timber 
owners prefer this method over the ``pay-as-cut'' method. The reasons 
are simple: title to the timber is transferred upon the closing of the 
sale and the buyer assumes the risk of any physical loss of timber to 
fire, insects, disease, storms, etc. Furthermore, the price to be paid 
for the timber is determined and received at the time of the sale.
  Unfortunately, in order for timber owners to qualify for the 
favorable capital gains treatment, they must market their timber on a 
``pay-as-cut'' basis under Section 631(b) which requires timber owners 
to sell their timber with a ``retained economic interest.'' This means 
that the timber owner, not the buyer, must bear the risk of any 
physical loss during the timber sale contract period and must be paid 
only for the timber that is actually harvested. As a result, this type 
of sale can be subject to fraud and abuse by the timber buyer. Since 
the buyer pays only for the timber that is removed and scaled, there is 
an incentive to waste poor quality timber by breaking the tree during 
the logging process, underscaling the timber, or removing the timber 
without scaling. But because 631(b) provides for the favorable tax 
treatment, many timber owners are forced into exposing themselves to 
unnecessary risk of loss by having to market their timber in this 
disadvantageous way instead of the more preferable lump-sum method.
  Like many of the provisions in the tax code, Section 631(b) is 
outdated and prevents good forestry business management. Timber 
farmers, who have usually spent decades producing their timber 
``crop'', should be able to receive equal tax treatment regardless of 
the method used for marketing their timber.
  In the past, the Joint Committee on Taxation has studied this 
legislation to consider what impact it might have on the Treasury and 
found that it would have no real cost--only a ``negligible change'' 
according to their analysis.
  The IRS has no business stepping in and dictating the kind of sales 
contract a landowner must choose. My legislation will provide greater 
consistency by removing the exclusive ``retained economic interest'' 
requirement in the IRC Section 631(b). Reform of 631(b) is important to 
our nation's non-industrial, private landowners because it will improve 
the economic viability of their forestry investments and protect the 
taxpayer from unnecessary exposure to risk of loss. This in turn will 
benefit the entire forest products industry, the U.S. economy and 
especially small landowners.

[[Page 3900]]



                          ____________________