[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 4881-4901]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BINGAMAN:
  S. 2139. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide 
grants to promote positive health behaviors in women; to the Committee 
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, the legislation I am introducing today 
entitled the ``Community Health Workers Act of 2002'' would improve 
access to health education and outreach services to women in medically 
underserved areas in the United States-New Mexico border region.
  Lack of access to adequate health care and health education is a 
significant problem along the United States-New Mexico border. While 
the access problem is in part due to a lack of insurance, it is also 
attributable to non-financial barriers to access. These barriers 
include a shortage of physicians and other health professionals, and 
hospitals; inadequate transportation; a shortage of bilingual health 
information and health providers; and culturally insensitive systems of 
care.
  This legislation would help to address the issue of access by 
providing $6 million in grants to State, local, and tribal 
organizations, including community health centers and public health 
departments, for the purpose of hiring community health workers to 
provide health education, outreach, and referrals to women and families 
who otherwise would have little or no contact with health care 
services.
  Recognizing factors such as poverty and language and cultural 
differences that often serve as barriers to health care access in 
medically underserved populations, community health workers are in a 
unique position to improve health outcomes and quality of care for 
groups that have traditionally lacked access to adequate services.
  The positive benefits of the community health worker model have been 
documented. Research has shown that community health workers have been 
effective in increasing the utilization of health preventive services 
such as cancer screenings and medical follow up for elevated blood 
pressure. Preliminary investigation of a community health workers 
project in New Mexico suggests that community health workers also help 
to increase enrollment in health insurance programs such as Medicaid 
and the Children's Health Insurance Program, SCHIP.
  According to an Institute of Medicine, IOM, report entitled, 
``Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in 
Healthcare,'' ``community health workers offer promise as a community-
based resource to increase racial and ethnic minorities' access to 
health care and to serve as a liaison between healthcare providers and 
the communities they serve.''
  Although the community health worker model is valued on the United 
States-Mexico border as well as other parts of the country that 
encounter challenges of meeting the health care needs of medically 
underserved populations, these programs often have difficulty securing 
adequate financial resources to maintain and expand upon their 
services. As a result, many of these programs are significantly limited 
in their ability to meet the ongoing and emerging health demands of 
their communities.
  The IOM report also notes that ``programs to support the use of 
community health workers . . . especially among medically underserved 
and racial and ethnic minority populations, should be expanded, 
evaluated, and replicated.''
  I am introducing this legislation to increase resources for a model 
that has shown significant promise for increasing access to quality 
health care and health education for families in medically underserved 
communities.
  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. 2139

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Community Health Workers Act 
     of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Chronic diseases, defined as any condition that 
     requires regular medical attention or medication, are the 
     leading cause of death and disability for women in the United 
     States across racial and ethnic groups.
       (2) According to the National Vital Statistics Report of 
     2001, the 5 leading causes of death among Hispanic, American 
     Indian, and African-American women are heart disease, cancer, 
     diabetes, cerebrovascular disease, and unintentional 
     injuries.
       (3) Unhealthy behaviors alone lead to more than 50 percent 
     of premature deaths in the United States.
       (4) Poor diet, physical inactivity, tobacco use, and 
     alcohol and drug abuse are the health risk behaviors that 
     most often lead to disease, premature death, and disability, 
     and are particularly prevalent among many groups of minority 
     women.
       (5) Over 60 percent of Hispanic and African-American women 
     are classified as overweight and over 30 percent are 
     classified as obese. Over 60 percent of American Indian women 
     are classified as obese.
       (6) American Indian women have the highest mortality rates 
     related to alcohol and drug use of all women in the United 
     States.
       (7) High poverty rates coupled with barriers to health 
     preventive services and medical care contribute to racial and 
     ethnic disparities in health factors, including premature 
     death, life expectancy, risk factors associated with major 
     diseases, and the extent and severity of illnesses.
       (8) There is increasing evidence that early life 
     experiences are associated with adult chronic disease and 
     that prevention and intervention services provided within the 
     community and the home may lessen the impact of chronic 
     outcomes, while strengthening families and communities.
       (9) Community health workers, who are primarily women, can 
     be a critical component in conducting health promotion and 
     disease prevention efforts in medically underserved 
     populations.
       (10) Recognizing the difficult barriers confronting 
     medically underserved communities (poverty, geographic 
     isolation, language and cultural differences, lack of 
     transportation, low literacy, and lack of access to 
     services), community health workers are in a unique position 
     to reduce preventable morbidity and mortality, improve the 
     quality of life, and increase the utilization of available 
     preventive health services for community members.
       (11) Research has shown that community health workers have 
     been effective in significantly increasing screening and 
     medical followup visits among residents with limited access 
     or underutilization of health care services.
       (12) States on the United States-Mexico border have high 
     percentages of impoverished and ethnic minority populations: 
     border States accommodate 60 percent of the total Hispanic 
     population and 23 percent of the total population below 200 
     percent poverty in the United States.

     SEC. 3. GRANTS TO PROMOTE POSITIVE HEALTH BEHAVIORS IN WOMEN.

       Part P of title III of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 280g et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 399O. GRANTS TO PROMOTE POSITIVE HEALTH BEHAVIORS IN 
                   WOMEN.

       ``(a) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary, in collaboration 
     with the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention and other Federal officials determined appropriate 
     by the Secretary, is authorized to award grants to States or 
     local or tribal units, to promote positive health behaviors 
     for women in target populations, especially racial and ethnic 
     minority women in medically underserved communities.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--Grants awarded pursuant to subsection 
     (a) may be used to support community health workers--
       ``(1) to educate, guide, and provide outreach in a 
     community setting regarding health problems prevalent among 
     women and especially among racial and ethnic minority women;
       ``(2) to educate, guide, and provide experiential learning 
     opportunities that target behavioral risk factors including--

[[Page 4882]]

       ``(A) poor nutrition;
       ``(B) physical inactivity;
       ``(C) being overweight or obese;
       ``(D) tobacco use;
       ``(E) alcohol and substance use;
       ``(F) injury and violence;
       ``(G) risky sexual behavior; and
       ``(H) mental health problems;
       ``(3) to educate and guide regarding effective strategies 
     to promote positive health behaviors within the family;
       ``(4) to educate and provide outreach regarding enrollment 
     in health insurance including the State Children's Health 
     Insurance Program under title XXI of the Social Security Act, 
     medicare under title XVIII of such Act and medicaid under 
     title XIX of such Act;
       ``(5) to promote community wellness and awareness; and
       ``(6) to educate and refer target populations to 
     appropriate health care agencies and community-based programs 
     and organizations in order to increase access to quality 
     health care services, including preventive health services.
       ``(c) Application.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each State or local or tribal unit 
     (including federally recognized tribes and Alaska native 
     villages) that desires to receive a grant under subsection 
     (a) shall submit an application to the Secretary, at such 
     time, in such manner, and accompanied by such additional 
     information as the Secretary may require.
       ``(2) Contents.--Each application submitted pursuant to 
     paragraph (1) shall--
       ``(A) describe the activities for which assistance under 
     this section is sought;
       ``(B) contain an assurance that with respect to each 
     community health worker program receiving funds under the 
     grant awarded, such program provides training and supervision 
     to community health workers to enable such workers to provide 
     authorized program services;
       ``(C) contain an assurance that the applicant will evaluate 
     the effectiveness of community health worker programs 
     receiving funds under the grant;
       ``(D) contain an assurance that each community health 
     worker program receiving funds under the grant will provide 
     services in the cultural context most appropriate for the 
     individuals served by the program;
       ``(E) contain a plan to document and disseminate project 
     description and results to other States and organizations as 
     identified by the Secretary; and
       ``(F) describe plans to enhance the capacity of individuals 
     to utilize health services and health-related social services 
     under Federal, State, and local programs by--
       ``(i) assisting individuals in establishing eligibility 
     under the programs and in receiving the services or other 
     benefits of the programs; and
       ``(ii) providing other services as the Secretary determines 
     to be appropriate, that may include transportation and 
     translation services.
       ``(d) Priority.--In awarding grants under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall give priority to those applicants--
       ``(1) who propose to target geographic areas--
       ``(A) with a high percentage of residents who are eligible 
     for health insurance but are uninsured or underinsured;
       ``(B) with a high percentage of families for whom English 
     is not their primary language; and
       ``(C) that encompass the United States-Mexico border 
     region;
       ``(2) with experience in providing health or health-related 
     social services to individuals who are underserved with 
     respect to such services; and
       ``(3) with documented community activity and experience 
     with community health workers.
       ``(e) Collaboration With Academic Institutions.--The 
     Secretary shall encourage community health worker programs 
     receiving funds under this section to collaborate with 
     academic institutions. Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to require such collaboration.
       ``(f) Quality Assurance and Cost-Effectiveness.--The 
     Secretary shall establish guidelines for assuring the quality 
     of the training and supervision of community health workers 
     under the programs funded under this section and for assuring 
     the cost-effectiveness of such programs.
       ``(g) Monitoring.--The Secretary shall monitor community 
     health worker programs identified in approved applications 
     and shall determine whether such programs are in compliance 
     with the guidelines established under subsection (e).
       ``(h) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary may provide 
     technical assistance to community health worker programs 
     identified in approved applications with respect to planning, 
     developing, and operating programs under the grant.
       ``(i) Report to Congress.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the date on 
     which the Secretary first awards grants under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report regarding the 
     grant project.
       ``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1) 
     shall include the following:
       ``(A) A description of the programs for which grant funds 
     were used.
       ``(B) The number of individuals served.
       ``(C) An evaluation of--
       ``(i) the effectiveness of these programs;
       ``(ii) the cost of these programs; and
       ``(iii) the impact of the project on the health outcomes of 
     the community residents.
       ``(D) Recommendations for sustaining the community health 
     worker programs developed or assisted under this section.
       ``(E) Recommendations regarding training to enhance career 
     opportunities for community health workers.
       ``(j) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Community health worker.--The term `community health 
     worker' means an individual who promotes health or nutrition 
     within the community in which the individual resides--
       ``(A) by serving as a liaison between communities and 
     health care agencies;
       ``(B) by providing guidance and social assistance to 
     community residents;
       ``(C) by enhancing community residents' ability to 
     effectively communicate with health care providers;
       ``(D) by providing culturally and linguistically 
     appropriate health or nutrition education;
       ``(E) by advocating for individual and community health or 
     nutrition needs; and
       ``(F) by providing referral and followup services.
       ``(2) Community setting.--The term `community setting' 
     means a home or a community organization located in the 
     neighborhood in which a participant resides.
       ``(3) Medically underserved community.--The term `medically 
     underserved community' means a community identified by a 
     State--
       ``(A) that has a substantial number of individuals who are 
     members of a medically underserved population, as defined by 
     section 330(b)(3); and
       ``(B) a significant portion of which is a health 
     professional shortage area as designated under section 332.
       ``(4) Support.--The term `support' means the provision of 
     training, supervision, and materials needed to effectively 
     deliver the services described in subsection (b), 
     reimbursement for services, and other benefits.
       ``(5) Target population.--The term `target population' 
     means women of reproductive age, regardless of their current 
     childbearing status.
       ``(k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
     $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005.''.

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KYL:
  S. 2180. A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Nylon MXD6; to the 
Committee on Finance.
 Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that would provide for a five-year temporary suspension of the duty on 
imports of Nylon MXD6, through December 31, 2007.
  Nylon MXD6 is polyamide, classified under Chapter 39 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, subheading 3908.10.10, 
HTSUS. It is a tough, transparent resin that is used by several 
companies throughout the U.S. to make packaging for food and other 
products.
  Temporary duty suspensions, when properly utilized, are an effective 
way to confer ``win-win'' benefits on consumers and the economy. 
Suspending the duty on an imported good encourages increased supply and 
availability of that good, and such increases benefit U.S. consumers. 
So long as we first ensure that no domestic businesses will be harmed, 
and that the impact on Federal revenue is negligible, such temporary 
duty suspensions clearly make for smart trade policy.
  The merits of a temporary duty-suspension bill are typically judged 
based on whether or not it is ``non-controversial.'' Such a bill is 
generally considered non-controversial only if there are no domestic 
producers who would be harmed by increased imports, and the revenue 
impact would be de minimis, that is, roughly $500,000 per year or less. 
Based on these criteria, this bill should not be controversial. It is 
my understanding that there are no domestic producers of Nylon MXD6, 
and that the duties paid on imports of the resin have historically been 
at or under $500,000.
  In addition to the usual benefits of this kind of legislation, it is 
my understanding that the importer of Nylon MXD6, Mitsubishi Gas 
Chemical-America, has plans to establish a domestic production facility 
in the United States, and hopes to have it on-line before this proposed 
duty suspension would expire. Temporarily suspending

[[Page 4883]]

the duty on the compound would help ease the company's transition to 
domestic production. The planned facility, in turn, would create new 
U.S. manufacturing jobs and contribute to our overall economic 
vitality. The facility would purchase domestically one of the two 
principal raw materials used to make the resin, and the revenue that 
local, state, and federal governments would collect from a permanently 
established, domestic production facility are likely to far outweigh 
the amount that will be collected through the duties imposed under 
current law.
  This is a good bill with no substantial costs involved. I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 2181. A bill to review, reform, and terminate unnecessary and 
inequitable Federal subsidies; to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs.
 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today, I am re-introducing 
legislation to establish a process to evaluate Federal subsidies and 
tax advantages received by corporations to ensure they are in the 
national interest, not the special interest. This bill, ``The Corporate 
Subsidy Reform Commission Act,'' is identical to a bill I introduced in 
previous years.
  Because we face diminishing resources, we must prioritize our level 
of Federal spending. Therefore, corporate welfare simply must be 
eliminated.
  There are more than 100 such corporate subsidy programs in the 
Federal budget today, requiring the Federal Government to spend 
approximately $65 billion a year.
  Terminating even some of these programs could save taxpayers tens of 
billions of dollars each year, money that could be used to cut taxes 
for lower-income Americans, bolster Social Security, pay down the 
national debt, and strengthen our military forces.
  In years past, Congress has insisted that it would eliminate the 
existence of this corporate welfare, but virtually no such program has 
been eliminated. Consequently, taxpayer dollars continue to be wasted 
as I speak.
  The Corporate Subsidy Reform Commission Act aims to remove the 
special treatment given to politically powerful industries and restore 
all taxpayers to a level playing field. It defines inequitable 
subsidies as those provided to corporations without a reasonable 
expectation that they will return a commensurate benefit to the public.
  The Act excludes any subsidies that are primarily for research and 
development, education, public health, public safety, or the 
environment. Also excluded are subsidies or tax advantages necessary to 
comply with international trade or treaty obligations.
  The Act would create a nine-member commission nominated by the 
President and the Congressional leadership. Federal agencies would be 
required to submit to the Commission, at the time of the 
Administration's next budget, a list of subsidies and tax advantages 
that each agency believes are inequitable.
  The Commission will provide recommendations to either terminate or 
reduce the corporate subsidies. The President has the authority under 
the Act to either terminate consideration of the Commission's 
recommendations, or submit the Commission's recommendations to the 
Congress as a legislative initiative.
  The Congress would then have four months to review the Commission's 
recommendations that have been endorsed by the President. At that time, 
the actions of all involved committees in each respective legislative 
body would be sent to the floor for debate, under expedited procedures.
  Many Federal subsidies and special-interest tax breaks for 
corporations are unnecessary, and do not provide a fair return to the 
taxpayers who bear the heavy burden of their cost. If a corporation is 
receiving taxpayer-funded subsidies or tax breaks that are unsupported 
by a compelling benefit to the public, the subsidy should be ended.
  Does it make sense for the Agriculture Department to spend $80 
million a year on a program, the Market Access Program, that subsidizes 
the overseas advertising campaigns of cash-strapped corporations such 
as Pillsbury, Dole, and Jim Beam?
  Why should the Commerce Department spend $211 million a year on the 
Advanced Technology Program to give research grants to consortiums of 
some of the largest and richest high-tech companies in this Nation?
  Where is the accountability to taxpayers here? They have been 
shortchanged at the expense of the special interests. This undermines 
our Nation's fiscal house, and impairs Congress' ability to respond to 
truly urgent needs such as health care, education, debt reduction, and 
national security.
  Unfortunately, the pervasive system of pork-barreling and special 
interest legislating is speeding along unabated in Washington. Instead 
of pursuing our Nation's priorities, both parties continue to spend 
without accountability. During my service in the Senate, I have worked 
to eliminate wasteful earmarks in appropriations bills. And yet this 
year alone, about $15 billion in pork barrel spending was approved by 
the Senate without going through any merit-based review process.
  I would rather eliminate corporate subsidies and inequitable tax 
subsidies without resorting to a commission. But we know that the 
influence of the special interests will prevent that effort from 
succeeding unless forceful action is taken.
  We need a credible process to identify corporate pork and eliminate 
it. This legislation is the first important step in alleviating the 
public burden of unnecessary corporate subsidies and tax 
breaks.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN:
  S. 2182. A bill to authorize funding for computer and network 
security research and development and research fellowship programs, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
 Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, Americans today live in an 
increasingly networked world. The system of interlinked computer 
networks known as the Internet, which not so long ago was a platform 
used only by a relatively narrow group of academic researchers, is 
today a core medium of communications and commerce for many millions of 
Americans. According to the Commerce Department, more than half of all 
Americans were using the Internet by last September, and the numbers 
are only growing.
  The spread of the Internet presents great new opportunities for the 
American society and economy. But there is a downside to an 
interconnected, networked world: security risks. The Internet connects 
people not just to friends, potential customers, and sources of 
information, but also to would-be hackers, viruses, and cybercriminals.
  Last July, after I became Chairman of the Commerce Committee's 
Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space, I chose cybersecurity 
as the topic for my first hearing. The message from that hearing was 
that cybersecurity risks are mounting. The complexity of computer 
networks and the breadth of functions handled online are growing faster 
than the country's computer security capabilities. New technologies, 
for example, ``always on'' Internet connections and wireless networking 
technologies, often make the problem worse, not better.
  The events of September 11 make this matter even more urgent. The 
fact is, America needs to be prepared for the possibility that future 
terrorists will try to strike not our buildings, streets, or airplanes, 
but our critical computer networks.
  Government can't provide a silver bullet solution to this problem. 
Ultimately, progress with respect to cybersecurity is going to require 
the energy and ingenuity of the entire technology sector.
  But one thing government can and should do is support basic 
cybersecurity research, so that the country's pool of cybersecurity 
knowledge and expertise keeps pace with the new and constantly evolving 
risks. This is an area where government involvement is sorely needed.
  That is why I am pleased to introduce today the Cyber Security 
Research and Development Act. Thanks

[[Page 4884]]

to the leadership of Congressman Sherry Boehlert, this legislation has 
already passed the House by an overwhelming bipartisan vote. I hope the 
Senate will be able to follow suit soon.
  This legislation, which has the widespread support of the Nation's 
technology sector, would significantly increase the amount of 
cybersecurity research in this country by creating important new 
research programs at the National Science Foundation, NSF, and National 
Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST. The NSF program would 
provide funding for innovative research, multidisciplinary academic 
centers devoted to cybersecurity, and new courses and fellowships to 
educate the cybersecurity experts of the future. The NIST program 
likewise would support cutting-edge cybersecurity research, with a 
special emphasis on promoting cooperative efforts between government, 
industry, and academia.
  I believe the stakes are high. In addition to the damage that 
cyberattacks could cause directly, the mere threat of security breaches 
can cripple the ongoing development of e-commerce. If the Internet is 
to reach its full potential, security must be improved.
  I therefore urge my colleagues to join me in making cybersecurity 
research and development a top priority, and to work with me in moving 
this bill forward.
  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. 2182

       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 ``Cyber Security Research and 
     Development Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Revolutionary advancements in computing and 
     communications technology have interconnected government, 
     commercial, scientific, and educational infrastructures--
     including critical infrastructures for electric power, 
     natural gas and petroleum production and distribution, 
     telecommunications, transportation, water supply, banking and 
     finance, and emergency and government services--in a vast, 
     interdependent physical and electronic network.
       (2) Exponential increases in inter-connectivity have 
     facilitated enhanced communications, economic growth, and the 
     delivery of services critical to the public welfare, but have 
     also increased the consequences of temporary or prolonged 
     failure.
       (3) A Department of Defense Joint Task Force concluded 
     after a 1997 United States information warfare exercise that 
     the results ``clearly demonstrated our lack of preparation 
     for a coordinated cyber and physical attack on our critical 
     military and civilian infrastructure''.
       (4) Computer security technology and systems implementation 
     lack--
       (A) sufficient long term research funding;
       (B) adequate coordination across Federal and State 
     government agencies and among government, academia, and 
     industry; and
       (C) sufficient numbers of outstanding researchers in the 
     field.
       (5) Accordingly, Federal investment in computer and network 
     security research and development must be significantly 
     increased to--
       (A) improve vulnerability assessment and technological and 
     systems solutions;
       (B) expand and improve the pool of information security 
     professionals, including researchers, in the United States 
     workforce; and
       (C) better coordinate information sharing and collaboration 
     among industry, government, and academic research projects.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act--
       (1) the term ``Director'' means the Director of the 
     National Science Foundation; and
       (2) the term ``institution of higher education'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 101 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).

     SEC. 4. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION RESEARCH.

       (a) Computer and Network Security Research Grants.--
       (1) In general.--The Director shall award grants for basic 
     research on innovative approaches to the structure of 
     computer and network hardware and software that are aimed at 
     enhancing computer security. Research areas may include--
       (A) authentication and cryptography;
       (B) computer forensics and intrusion detection;
       (C) reliability of computer and network applications, 
     middleware, operating systems, and communications 
     infrastructure;
       (D) privacy and confidentiality;
       (E) firewall technology;
       (F) emerging threats, including malicious such as viruses 
     and worms;
       (G) vulnerability assessments;
       (H) operations and control systems management; and
       (I) management of interoperable digital certificates or 
     digital watermarking.
       (2) Merit review; competition.--Grants shall be awarded 
     under this section on a merit-reviewed competitive basis.
       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to 
     carry out this subsection--
       (A) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $46,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $52,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (E) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.
       (b) Computer and Network Security Research Centers.--
       (1) In general.--The Director shall award multiyear grants, 
     subject to the availability of appropriations, to 
     institutions of higher education (or consortia thereof) to 
     establish multidisciplinary Centers for Computer and Network 
     Security Research. Institutions of higher education (or 
     consortia thereof) receiving such grants may partner with one 
     or more government laboratories or for-profit institutions.
       (2) Merit review; competition.--Grants shall be awarded 
     under this subsection on a merit-reviewed competitive basis.
       (3) Purpose.--The purpose of the Centers shall be to 
     generate innovative approaches to computer and network 
     security by conducting cutting-edge, multidisciplinary 
     research in computer and network security, including the 
     research areas described in subsection (a)(1).
       (4) Applications.--An institution of higher education (or a 
     consortium of such institutions) seeking funding under this 
     subsection shall submit an application to the Director at 
     such time, in such manner, and containing such information as 
     the Director may require. The application shall include, at a 
     minimum, a description of--
       (A) the research projects that will be undertaken by the 
     Center and the contributions of each of the participating 
     entities;
       (B) how the Center will promote active collaboration among 
     scientists and engineers from different disciplines, such as 
     computer scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and social 
     science researchers;
       (C) how the Center will contribute to increasing the number 
     of computer and network security researchers and other 
     professionals; and
       (D) how the center will disseminate research results 
     quickly and widely to improve cybersecurity in information 
     technology networks, products, and services.
       (5) Criteria.--In evaluating the applications submitted 
     under paragraph (4), the Director shall consider, at a 
     minimum--
       (A) the ability of the applicant to generate innovative 
     approaches to computer and network security and effectively 
     carry out the research program;
       (B) the experience of the applicant in conducting research 
     on computer and network security and the capacity of the 
     applicant to foster new multidisciplinary collaborations;
       (C) the capacity of the applicant to attract and provide 
     adequate support for undergraduate and graduate students and 
     postdoctoral fellows to pursue computer and network security 
     research; and
       (D) the extent to which the applicant will partner with 
     government laboratories or for-profit entities, and the role 
     the government laboratories or for-profit entities will play 
     in the research undertaken by the Center.
       (6) Annual meeting.--The Director shall convene an annual 
     meeting of the Centers in order to foster collaboration and 
     communication between Center participants.
       (7) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated for the National Science Foundation to 
     carry out this subsection--
       (A) $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $24,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $36,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $36,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (E) $36,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.

     SEC. 5. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION COMPUTER AND NETWORK 
                   SECURITY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Computer and Network Security Capacity Building 
     Grants.--
       (1) In general.--The Director shall establish a program to 
     award grants to institutions of higher education (or 
     consortia thereof) to establish or improve undergraduate and 
     master's degree programs in computer and network security, to 
     increase the number of students who pursue undergraduate or 
     master's degrees in fields related to computer and network 
     security, and to provide students with experience in 
     government or industry related to their computer and network 
     security studies.
       (2) Merit review.--Grants shall be awarded under this 
     subsection on a merit-reviewed competitive basis.
       (3) Use of funds.--Grants awarded under this subsection 
     shall be used for activities that enhance the ability of an 
     institution of higher education (or consortium thereof) to

[[Page 4885]]

     provide high-quality undergraduate and master's degree 
     programs in computer and network security and to recruit and 
     retain increased numbers of students to such programs. 
     Activities may include--
       (A) revising curriculum to better prepare undergraduate and 
     master's degree students for careers in computer and network 
     security;
       (B) establishing degree and certificate programs in 
     computer and network security;
       (C) creating opportunities for undergraduate students to 
     participate in computer and network security research 
     projects;
       (D) acquiring equipment necessary for student instruction 
     in computer and network security, including the installation 
     of testbed networks for student use;
       (E) providing opportunities for faculty to work with local 
     or Federal Government agencies, private industry, or other 
     academic institutions to develop new expertise or to 
     formulate new research directions in computer and network 
     security;
       (F) establishing collaborations with other academic 
     institutions or departments that seek to establish, expand, 
     or enhance programs in computer and network security;
       (G) establishing student internships in computer and 
     network security at government agencies or in private 
     industry;
       (H) establishing or enhancing bridge programs in computer 
     and network security between community colleges and 
     universities; and
       (I) any other activities the Director determines will 
     accomplish the goals of this subsection.
       (4) Selection process.--
       (A) Application.--An institution of higher education (or a 
     consortium thereof) seeking funding under this subsection 
     shall submit an application to the Director at such time, in 
     such manner, and containing such information as the Director 
     may require. The application shall include, at a minimum--
       (i) a description of the applicant's computer and network 
     security research and instructional capacity, and in the case 
     of an application from a consortium of institutions of higher 
     education, a description of the role that each member will 
     play in implementing the proposal;
       (ii) a comprehensive plan by which the institution or 
     consortium will build instructional capacity in computer and 
     information security;
       (iii) a description of relevant collaborations with 
     government agencies or private industry that inform the 
     instructional program in computer and network security;
       (iv) a survey of the applicant's historic student 
     enrollment and placement data in fields related to computer 
     and network security and a study of potential enrollment and 
     placement for students enrolled in the proposed computer and 
     network security program; and
       (v) a plan to evaluate the success of the proposed computer 
     and network security program, including post-graduation 
     assessment of graduate school and job placement and retention 
     rates as well as the relevance of the instructional program 
     to graduate study and to the workplace.
       (B) Awards.--(i) The Director shall ensure, to the extent 
     practicable, that grants are awarded under this subsection in 
     a wide range of geographic areas and categories of 
     institutions of higher education.
       (ii) The Director shall award grants under this subsection 
     for a period not to exceed 5 years.
       (5) Assessment required.--The Director shall evaluate the 
     program established under this subsection no later than 6 
     years after the establishment of the program. At a minimum, 
     the Director shall evaluate the extent to which the grants 
     achieved their objectives of increasing the quality and 
     quantity of students pursuing undergraduate or master's 
     degrees in computer and network security.
       (6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to 
     carry out this subsection--
       (A) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (E) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.
       (b) Scientific and Advanced Technology Act of 1992.--
       (1) Grants.--The Director shall provide grants under the 
     Scientific and Advanced Technology Act of 1992 for the 
     purposes of section 3(a) and (b) of that Act, except that the 
     activities supported pursuant to this subsection shall be 
     limited to improving education in fields related to computer 
     and network security.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to 
     carry out this subsection--
       (A) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $1,250,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $1,250,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $1,250,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (E) $1,250,000 for fiscal year 2007.
       (c) Graduate Traineeships in Computer and Network Security 
     Research.--
       (1) In general.--The Director shall establish a program to 
     award grants to institutions of higher education to establish 
     traineeship programs for graduate students who pursue 
     computer and network security research leading to a doctorate 
     degree by providing funding and other assistance, and by 
     providing graduate students with research experience in 
     government or industry related to the students' computer and 
     network security studies.
       (2) Merit review.--Grants shall be provided under this 
     subsection on a merit-reviewed competitive basis.
       (3) Use of funds.--An institution of higher education shall 
     use grant funds for the purposes of--
       (A) providing fellowships to students who are citizens, 
     nationals, or lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens of 
     the United States and are pursuing research in computer or 
     network security leading to a doctorate degree;
       (B) paying tuition and fees for students receiving 
     fellowships under subparagraph (A);
       (C) establishing scientific internship programs for 
     students receiving fellowships under subparagraph (A) in 
     computer and network security at for-profit institutions or 
     government laboratories; and
       (D) other costs associated with the administration of the 
     program.
       (4) Fellowship amount.--Fellowships provided under 
     paragraph (3)(A) shall be in the amount of $25,000 per year, 
     or the level of the National Science Foundation Graduate 
     Research Fellowships, whichever is greater, for up to 3 
     years.
       (5) Selection process.--An institution of higher education 
     seeking funding under this subsection shall submit an 
     application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the Director may require. The 
     application shall include, at a minimum, a description of--
       (A) the instructional program and research opportunities in 
     computer and network security available to graduate students 
     at the applicant's institution; and
       (B) the internship program to be established, including the 
     opportunities that will be made available to students for 
     internships at for-profit institutions and government 
     laboratories.
       (6) Review of applications.--In evaluating the applications 
     submitted under paragraph (5), the Director shall consider--
       (A) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out 
     the proposed program;
       (B) the quality of the applicant's existing research and 
     education programs;
       (C) the likelihood that the program will recruit increased 
     numbers of students to pursue and earn doctorate degrees in 
     computer and network security;
       (D) the nature and quality of the internship program 
     established through collaborations with government 
     laboratories and for-profit institutions;
       (E) the integration of internship opportunities into 
     graduate students' research; and
       (F) the relevance of the proposed program to current and 
     future computer and network security needs.
       (7) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to 
     carry our this subsection--
       (A) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (E) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.
       (d) Graduate Research Fellowships Program Support.--
     Computer and network security shall be included among the 
     fields of specialization supported by the National Science 
     Foundation's Graduate Research Fellowships program under 
     section 10 of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 
     U.S.C. 1869).

     SEC. 6. CONSULTATION.

       In carrying out sections 4 and 5, the Director shall 
     consult with other Federal agencies.

     SEC. 7. FOSTERING RESEARCH AND EDUCATION IN COMPUTER AND 
                   NETWORK SECURITY.

       Section 3(a) of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 
     (42 U.S.C. 1862(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (6);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (7) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(8) to take a leading role in fostering and supporting 
     research and education activities to improve the security of 
     networked information systems.''.

     SEC. 8. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY 
                   RESEARCH PROGRAM.

       The National Institute of Standards and Technology Act is 
     amended--
       (1) by moving section 22 to the end of the Act and 
     redesignating it as section 32;
       (2) by inserting after section 21 the following new 
     section:


           ``research program on security of computer systems

       ``Sec. 22. (a) Establishment.--The Director shall establish 
     a program of assistance to institutions of higher education 
     that enter into partnerships with for-profit entities to 
     support research to improve the security of computer systems. 
     The partnerships may also include government laboratories. 
     The program shall--
       ``(1) include multidisciplinary, long-term, high-risk 
     research;

[[Page 4886]]

       ``(2) include research directed toward addressing needs 
     identified through the activities of the Computer System 
     Security and Privacy Advisory Board under section 20(f); and
       ``(3) promote the development of a robust research 
     community working at the leading edge of knowledge in subject 
     areas relevant to the security of computer systems by 
     providing support for graduate students, post-doctoral 
     researchers, and senior researchers.
       ``(b) Fellowships.--(1) The Director is authorized to 
     establish a program to award post-doctoral research 
     fellowships to individuals who are citizens, nationals, or 
     lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens of the United 
     States and are seeking research positions at institutions, 
     including the Institute, engaged in research activities 
     related to the security of computer systems, including the 
     research areas described in section 4(a)(1) of the Cyber 
     Security Research and Development Act.
       ``(2) The Director is authorized to establish a program to 
     award senior research fellowships to individuals seeking 
     research positions at institutions, including the Institute, 
     engaged in research activities related to the security of 
     computer systems, including the research areas described in 
     section 4(a)(1) of the Cyber Security Research and 
     Development Act. Senior research fellowships shall be made 
     available for established researchers at institutions of 
     higher education who seek to change research fields and 
     pursue studies related to the security of computer systems.
       ``(3)(A) To be eligible for an award under this subsection, 
     an individual shall submit an application to the Director at 
     such time, in such manner, and containing such information as 
     the Director may require.
       ``(B) Under this subsection, the Director is authorized to 
     provide stipends for post-doctoral research fellowships at 
     the level of the Institute's Post Doctoral Research 
     Fellowship Program and senior research fellowships at levels 
     consistent with support for a faculty member in a sabbatical 
     position.
       ``(c) Awards; Applications.--The Director is authorized to 
     award grants or cooperative agreements to institutions of 
     higher education to carry out the program established under 
     subsection (a). To be eligible for an award under this 
     section, an institution of higher education shall submit an 
     application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the Director may require. The 
     application shall include, at a minimum, a description of--
       ``(1) the number of graduate students anticipated to 
     participate in the research project and the level of support 
     to be provided to each;
       ``(2) the number of post-doctoral research positions 
     included under the research project and the level of support 
     to be provided to each;
       ``(3) the number of individuals, if any, intending to 
     change research fields and pursue studies related to the 
     security of computer systems to be included under the 
     research project and the level of support to be provided to 
     each; and
       ``(4) how the for-profit entities and any other partners 
     will participate in developing and carrying out the research 
     and education agenda of the partnership.
       ``(d) Program Operation.--(1) The program established under 
     subsection (a) shall be managed by individuals who shall have 
     both expertise in research related to the security of 
     computer systems and knowledge of the vulnerabilities of 
     existing computer systems. The Director shall designate such 
     individuals as program managers.
       ``(2) Program managers designated under paragraph (1) may 
     be new or existing employees of the Institute or individuals 
     on assignment at the Institute under the Intergovernmental 
     Personnel Act of 1970.
       ``(3) Program managers designated under paragraph (1) shall 
     be responsible for--
       ``(A) establishing and publicizing the broad research goals 
     for the program;
       ``(B) soliciting applications for specific research 
     projects to address the goals developed under subparagraph 
     (A);
       ``(C) selecting research projects for support under the 
     program from among applications submitted to the Institute, 
     following consideration of--
       ``(i) the novelty and scientific and technical merit of the 
     proposed projects;
       ``(ii) the demonstrated capabilities of the individual or 
     individuals submitting the applications to successfully carry 
     out the proposed research;
       ``(iii) the impact the proposed projects will have on 
     increasing the number of computer security researchers;
       ``(iv) the nature of the participation by for-profit 
     entities and the extent to which the proposed projects 
     address the concerns of industry; and
       ``(v) other criteria determined by the Director, based on 
     information specified for inclusion in applications under 
     subsection (c); and
       ``(D) monitoring the progress of research projects 
     supported under the program.
       ``(e) Review of Program.--(1) The Director shall 
     periodically review the portfolio of research awards 
     monitored by each program manager designated in accordance 
     with subsection (d). In conducting those reviews, the 
     Director shall seek the advice of the Computer System 
     Security and Privacy Advisory Board, established under 
     section 21, on the appropriateness of the research goals and 
     on the quality and utility of research projects managed by 
     program managers in accordance with subsection (d).
       ``(2) The Director shall also contract with the National 
     Research Council for a comprehensive review of the program 
     established under subsection (a) during the 5th year of the 
     program. Such review shall include an assessment of the 
     scientific quality of the research conducted, the relevance 
     of the research results obtained to the goals of the program 
     established under subsection (d)(3)(A), and the progress of 
     the program in promoting the development of a substantial 
     academic research community working at the leading edge of 
     knowledge in the field. The Director shall submit to Congress 
     a report on the results of the review under this paragraph no 
     later than six years after the initiation of the program.
       ``(f) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) the term `computer system' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 20(d)(1); and
       ``(2) the term `institution of higher education' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 101 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).''; and
       (3) in section 20(d)(1)(B)(i) (15 U.S.C. 278g-
     3(d)(1)(B)(i)), by inserting ``and computer networks'' after 
     ``computers''.

     SEC. 9. COMPUTER SECURITY REVIEW, PUBLIC MEETINGS, AND 
                   INFORMATION.

       Section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Secretary $1,060,000 for fiscal year 2003 and $1,090,000 for 
     fiscal year 2004 to enable the Computer System Security and 
     Privacy Advisory Board, established by section 21, to 
     identify emerging issues, including research needs, related 
     to computer security, privacy, and cryptography and, as 
     appropriate, to convene public meetings on those subjects, 
     receive presentations, and publish reports, digests, and 
     summaries for public distribution on those subjects.''.

     SEC. 10. INTRAMURAL SECURITY RESEARCH.

       Section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3) is further amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) As part of the research activities conducted in 
     accordance with subsection (b)(4), the Institute shall--
       ``(1) conduct a research program to address emerging 
     technologies associated with assembling a networked computer 
     system from components while ensuring it maintains desired 
     security properties;
       ``(2) carry out research associated with improving the 
     security of real-time computing and communications systems 
     for use in process control; and
       ``(3) carry out multidisciplinary, long-term, high-risk 
     research on ways to improve the security of computer 
     systems.''.

     SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
     Commerce for the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology--
       (1) for activities under section 22 of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology Act, as added by 
     section 8 of this Act--
       (A) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $55,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (E) $85,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       (F) such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2008 
     through 2012; and
       (2) for activities under section 20(d) of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology Act, as added by 
     section 10 of this Act--
       (A) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (B) $6,200,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (C) $6,400,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (D) $6,600,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (E) $6,800,000 for fiscal year 2007.

     SEC. 12. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY ON COMPUTER AND 
                   NETWORK SECURITY IN CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES.

       (a) Study.--Not later than 3 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of the National Institute 
     of Standards and Technology shall enter into an arrangement 
     with the National Research Council of the National Academy of 
     Sciences to conduct a study of the vulnerabilities of the 
     Nation's network infrastructure and make recommendations for 
     appropriate improvements. The National Research Council 
     shall--
       (1) review existing studies and associated data on the 
     architectural, hardware, and software vulnerabilities and 
     interdependencies in United States critical infrastructure 
     networks;
       (2) identify and assess gaps in technical capability for 
     robust critical infrastructure network security, and make 
     recommendations for research priorities and resource 
     requirements; and

[[Page 4887]]

       (3) review any and all other essential elements of computer 
     and network security, including security of industrial 
     process controls, to be determined in the conduct of the 
     study.
       (b) Report.--The Director of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology shall transmit a report containing 
     the results of the study and recommendations required by 
     subsection (a) to the Congress not later than 21 months after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Security.--The Director of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology shall ensure that no information 
     that is classified is included in any publicly released 
     version of the report required by this section.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce for the 
     National Institute of Standards and Technology for the 
     purposes of carrying out this section, $700,000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HUTCHINSON:
  S. 2183. A bill to provide emergency agricultural assistance to 
producers of the 2002 crop; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
and Forestry.
 Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a 
copy of the ``Emergency Agricultural Assistance Act of 2002'', which I 
am introducing today be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2183

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency 
     Agricultural Assistance Act of 2002''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                    TITLE I--MARKET LOSS ASSISTANCE

Sec. 101. Market loss assistance.
Sec. 102. Oilseeds.
Sec. 103. Peanuts.
Sec. 104. Honey.
Sec. 105. Wool and mohair.
Sec. 106. Cottonseed.
Sec. 107. Specialty crops.
Sec. 108. Loan deficiency payments.
Sec. 109. Payments in lieu of loan deficiency payments for grazed 
              acreage.
Sec. 110. Milk.
Sec. 111. Pulse crops.
Sec. 112. Tobacco.
Sec. 113. Livestock feed assistance program.
Sec. 114. Increase in payment limitations regarding loan deficiency 
              payments and marketing loan gains.

                        TITLE II--ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 201. Obligation period.
Sec. 202. Commodity Credit Corporation.
Sec. 203. Regulations.

                    TITLE I--MARKET LOSS ASSISTANCE

     SEC. 101. MARKET LOSS ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture (referred to 
     in this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall, to the maximum 
     extent practicable, use $5,603,000,000 of funds of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation to make a market loss assistance 
     payment to owners and producers on a farm that are eligible 
     for a final payment for fiscal year 2002 under a production 
     flexibility contract for the farm under the Agricultural 
     Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.).
       (b) Amount.--The amount of assistance made available to 
     owners and producers on a farm under this section shall be 
     proportionate to the amount of the total contract payments 
     received by the owners and producers for fiscal year 2002 
     under a production flexibility contract for the farm under 
     the Agricultural Market Transition Act.

     SEC. 102. OILSEEDS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall use $466,000,000 of 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to make payments to 
     producers that planted a 2002 crop of oilseeds (as defined in 
     section 102 of the Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 
     U.S.C. 7202)).
       (b) Computation.--A payment to producers on a farm under 
     this section for an oilseed shall be equal to the product 
     obtained by multiplying--
       (1) a payment rate determined by the Secretary;
       (2) the acreage determined under subsection (c); and
       (3) the yield determined under subsection (d).
       (c) Acreage.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     acreage of the producers on the farm for an oilseed under 
     subsection (b)(2) shall be equal to the number of acres 
     planted to the oilseed by the producers on the farm during 
     the 1999, 2000, or 2001 crop year, whichever is greatest, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (2) New producers.--In the case of producers on a farm that 
     planted acreage to a type of oilseed during the 2002 crop 
     year but not the 1999, 2000, or 2001 crop year, the acreage 
     of the producers for the type of oilseed under subsection 
     (b)(2) shall be equal to the number of acres planted to the 
     type of oilseed by the producers on the farm during the 2002 
     crop year, as determined by the Secretary.
       (d) Yield.--
       (1) Soybeans.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), in the 
     case of soybeans, the yield of the producers on a farm under 
     subsection (b)(3) shall be equal to the greater of--
       (A) the average county yield per harvested acre for each of 
     the 1997 through 2001 crop years, excluding the crop year 
     with the greatest yield per harvested acre and the crop year 
     with the lowest yield per harvested acre; or
       (B) the actual yield of the producers on the farm for the 
     1999, 2000, or 2001 crop year, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (2) Other oilseeds.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), 
     in the case of oilseeds other than soybeans, the yield of the 
     producers on a farm under subsection (b)(3) shall be equal to 
     the greater of--
       (A) the average national yield per harvested acre for each 
     of the 1997 through 2001 crop years, excluding the crop year 
     with the greatest yield per harvested acre and the crop year 
     with the lowest yield per harvested acre; or
       (B) the actual yield of the producers on the farm for the 
     1999, 2000, or 2001 crop year, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (3) New producers.--In the case of producers on a farm that 
     planted acreage to a type of an oilseed during the 2002 crop 
     year but not the 1999, 2000, or 2001 crop year, the yield of 
     the producers on a farm under subsection (b)(3) shall be 
     equal to the greater of--
       (A) the average county yield per harvested acre for each of 
     the 1997 through 2001 crop years, excluding the crop year 
     with the greatest yield per harvested acre and the crop year 
     with the lowest yield per harvested acre; or
       (B) the actual yield of the producers on the farm for the 
     2002 crop.
       (4) Data source.--To the maximum extent available, the 
     Secretary shall use data provided by the National 
     Agricultural Statistics Service to carry out this subsection.

     SEC. 103. PEANUTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall use not more than 
     $55,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to 
     provide payments to producers of quota peanuts or additional 
     peanuts to partially compensate the producers for continuing 
     low commodity prices, and increasing costs of production, for 
     the 2002 crop year.
       (b) Amount.--The amount of a payment made to producers on a 
     farm of quota peanuts or additional peanuts under subsection 
     (a) shall be equal to the product obtained by multiplying--
       (1) the quantity of quota peanuts or additional peanuts 
     produced or considered produced on the farm during the 2002 
     crop year; and
       (2) a payment rate equal to--
       (A) in the case of quota peanuts, $30.50 per ton; and
       (B) in the case of additional peanuts, $16.00 per ton.
       (c) Losses.--The Secretary shall use such sums of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation as are necessary to offset 
     losses for the 2001 crop of peanuts described in section 
     155(d) of the Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 
     7271(d)).

     SEC. 104. HONEY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall use $93,000,000 of 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to make available 
     recourse loans to producers of the 2002 crop of honey on fair 
     and reasonable terms and conditions, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (b) Loan Rate.--The loan rate for a loan under subsection 
     (a) shall be equal to 85 percent of the average price of 
     honey during the 5-crop year period preceding the 2002 crop 
     year, excluding the crop year in which the average price of 
     honey was the highest and the crop year in which the average 
     price of honey was the lowest in the period.
       (c) Term of Loan.--A loan under this section shall have a 
     term of 9 months beginning on the first day of the first 
     month after the month in which the loan is made.

     SEC. 105. WOOL AND MOHAIR.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall use $10,000,000 of 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to provide a 
     supplemental payment under section 814 of the Agriculture, 
     Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (114 Stat. 1549, 1549A-55), 
     to producers of wool, and producers of mohair, for the 2002 
     marketing year that received a payment under that section.
       (b) Payment Rate.--The Secretary shall adjust the payment 
     rate specified in that section to reflect the amount made 
     available for payments under this section.

     SEC. 106. COTTONSEED.

       The Secretary shall use $100,000,000 of funds of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation to provide assistance to 
     producers and first-handlers of the 2002 crop of cottonseed.

     SEC. 107. SPECIALTY CROPS.

       (a) Definition of Specialty Crop.--In this section, the 
     term ``specialty crop'' means

[[Page 4888]]

     any agricultural commodity, other than wheat, feed grains, 
     oilseeds, cotton, rice, peanuts, or tobacco.
       (b) Grants.--The Secretary shall use $150,000,000 of funds 
     of the Commodity Credit Corporation to make a grant to each 
     State in an amount that represents the proportion that--
       (1) the value of specialty crop production in the State; 
     bears to
       (2) the value of specialty crop production in all States.
       (c) Use.--As a condition of the receipt of a grant under 
     this section, a State shall agree to use the grant to support 
     specialty crops.
       (d) Purchases for School Nutrition Programs.--The Secretary 
     shall use not less than $55,000,000 of the funds made 
     available under subsection (a) to purchase agricultural 
     commodities of the type distributed under section 6(a) of the 
     Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1755(a)) for distribution to schools and service institutions 
     in accordance with section 6(a) of that Act.

     SEC. 108. LOAN DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS.

       Section 135 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7235) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``the 2000 crop 
     year'' and inserting ``each of the 2000 through 2002 crop 
     years''; and
       (2) by striking subsections (e) and (f) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(e) Beneficial Interest.--
       ``(1) In general.--A producer shall be eligible for a 
     payment for a loan commodity under this section only if the 
     producer has a beneficial interest in the loan commodity, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Application.--The Secretary shall make a payment 
     under this section to the producers on a farm with respect to 
     a quantity of a loan commodity as of the earlier of--
       ``(A) the date on which the producers on the farm marketed 
     or otherwise lost beneficial interest in the loan commodity, 
     as determined by the Secretary; or
       ``(B) the date the producers on the farm request the 
     payment.''.

     SEC. 109. PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF LOAN DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS FOR 
                   GRAZED ACREAGE.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle C of title I of the Federal 
     Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7231 
     et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 138. PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF LOAN DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS FOR 
                   GRAZED ACREAGE.

       ``(a) In General.--For the 2002 crop of wheat, grain 
     sorghum, barley, and oats, in the case of the producers on a 
     farm that would be eligible for a loan deficiency payment 
     under section 135 for wheat, grain sorghum, barley, or oats, 
     but that elects to use acreage planted to the wheat, grain 
     sorghum, barley, or oats for the grazing of livestock, the 
     Secretary shall make a payment to the producers on the farm 
     under this section if the producers on the farm enter into an 
     agreement with the Secretary to forgo any other harvesting of 
     the wheat, grain sorghum, barley, or oats on the acreage.
       ``(b) Payment Amount.--The amount of a payment made to the 
     producers on a farm under this section shall be equal to the 
     amount obtained by multiplying--
       ``(1) the loan deficiency payment rate determined under 
     section 135(c) in effect, as of the date of the agreement, 
     for the county in which the farm is located; by
       ``(2) the payment quantity obtained by multiplying--
       ``(A) the quantity of the grazed acreage on the farm with 
     respect to which the producers on the farm elect to forgo 
     harvesting of wheat, grain sorghum, barley, or oats; and
       ``(B) the payment yield for that contract commodity on the 
     farm.
       ``(c) Time, Manner, and Availability of Payment.--
       ``(1) Time and manner.--A payment under this section shall 
     be made at the same time and in the same manner as loan 
     deficiency payments are made under section 135.
       ``(2) Availability.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     availability period for the payment authorized by this 
     section that is consistent with the availability period for 
     wheat, grain sorghum, barley, and oats established by the 
     Secretary for marketing assistance loans authorized by this 
     subtitle.
       ``(d) Prohibition on Crop Insurance or Noninsured Crop 
     Assistance.--The producers on a farm shall not be eligible 
     for insurance under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 
     1501 et seq.) or noninsured crop assistance under section 196 
     with respect to a crop of wheat, grain sorghum, barley, or 
     oats planted on acreage that the producers on the farm elect, 
     in the agreement required by subsection (a), to use for the 
     grazing of livestock in lieu of any other harvesting of the 
     crop.''.

     SEC. 110. MILK.

       Section 141 of the Agricultural Market Transition Act (7 
     U.S.C. 7251) is amended by striking ``May 31, 2002'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``December 31, 2002''.

     SEC. 111. PULSE CROPS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall use $20,000,000 of 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to provide 
     assistance in the form of a market loss assistance payment to 
     owners and producers on a farm that grow a 2002 crop of dry 
     peas, lentils, or chickpeas (collectively referred to in this 
     section as a ``pulse crop'').
       (b) Computation.--A payment to owners and producers on a 
     farm under this section for a pulse crop shall be equal to 
     the product obtained by multiplying--
       (1) a payment rate determined by the Secretary; by
       (2) the acreage of the producers on the farm for the pulse 
     crop determined under subsection (c).
       (c) Acreage.--
       (1) In general.--The acreage of the producers on the farm 
     for a pulse crop under subsection (b)(2) shall be equal to 
     the number of acres planted to the pulse crop by the owners 
     and producers on the farm during the 1999, 2000, or 2001 crop 
     year, whichever is greatest.
       (2) Basis.--For the purpose of paragraph (1), the number of 
     acres planted to a pulse crop by the owners and producers on 
     the farm for a crop year shall be based on (as determined by 
     the Secretary)--
       (A) the number of acres planted to the pulse crop for the 
     crop year by the owners and producers on the farm, including 
     any acreage that is included in reports that are filed late; 
     or
       (B) the number of acres planted to the pulse crop for the 
     crop year for the purpose of the Federal crop insurance 
     program established under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 
     U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).

     SEC. 112. TOBACCO.

       (a) Payments.--The Secretary shall use $100,000,000 of 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to provide 
     supplemental payments to owners, controllers, and growers of 
     tobacco for which a basic quota or allotment is established 
     for the 2002 crop year under part I of subtitle B of title 
     III of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1311 
     et seq.), as determined by the Secretary.
       (b) Loan Forfeitures.--Notwithstanding sections 106 through 
     106B of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1445 through 
     1445-2)--
       (1) a producer-owned cooperative marketing association may 
     fully settle (without further cost to the Association) a loan 
     made for each of the 2000 and 2001 crops of types 21, 22, 23, 
     35, 36, and 37 of an agricultural commodity under sections 
     106 through 106B of that Act by forfeiting to the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation the agricultural commodity covered by the 
     loan regardless of the condition of the commodity;
       (2) any losses to the Commodity Credit Corporation as a 
     result of paragraph (1)--
       (A) shall not be charged to the Account (as defined in 
     section 106B(a) of that Act); and
       (B) shall not affect the amount of any assessment imposed 
     against the commodity under sections 106 through 106B of that 
     Act; and
       (3) the commodity forfeited pursuant to this subsection--
       (A) shall not be counted for the purposes of any 
     determination for any year pursuant to section 319 of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1314e); and
       (B) may be disposed of in a manner determined by the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, except that the commodity may not 
     be sold for use in the United States for human consumption.

     SEC. 113. LIVESTOCK FEED ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

       The Secretary shall use $500,000,000 of funds of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation to provide livestock feed 
     assistance to livestock producers affected by disasters 
     during calendar year 2001 or 2002.

     SEC. 114. INCREASE IN PAYMENT LIMITATIONS REGARDING LOAN 
                   DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS AND MARKETING LOAN GAINS.

       Notwithstanding section 1001(2) of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308(1)), the total amount of the payments 
     specified in section 1001(3) of that Act (7 U.S.C. 1308(3)) 
     that a person shall be entitled to receive for 1 or more 
     contract commodities and oilseeds under the Agricultural 
     Market Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.) during the 2002 
     crop year may not exceed $150,000.

                        TITLE II--ADMINISTRATION

     SEC. 201. OBLIGATION PERIOD.

       The Secretary and the Commodity Credit Corporation shall 
     obligate funds only during fiscal year 2002 to carry out this 
     Act and the amendments made by this Act (other than sections 
     106, 107, and 110).

     SEC. 202. COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION.

       Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Secretary 
     shall use the funds, facilities, and authorities of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out this Act.

     SEC. 203. REGULATIONS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may promulgate such 
     regulations as are necessary to implement this Act and the 
     amendments made by this Act.
       (b) Procedure.--The promulgation of the regulations and 
     administration of the amendments made by this Act shall be 
     made without regard to--
       (1) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code;
       (2) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture 
     effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), relating to 
     notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in 
     rulemaking; and

[[Page 4889]]

       (3) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly 
     known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act'').
       (c) Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking.--In carrying 
     out this section, the Secretary shall use the authority 
     provided under section 808 of title 5, United States 
     Code.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BREAUX (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. 
        Landrieu, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bayh, Mrs. 
        Clinton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Feinstein, 
        Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. 
        Wellstone, Mr. Levin, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Reed, Mr. Harkin, Ms. 
        Mikulski, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Dayton, and Ms. 
        Cantwell):
  S. 2184. A bill to provide for the reissuance of a rule relating to 
ergonomics; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to join 
my colleague Senator Breaux in introducing legislation which would 
require the Secretary of Labor to issue a new ergonomics standard 
within two years of the bill's enactment. The measure is similar to 
legislation I cosponsored last year, S. 598, but includes additional 
provisions to ensure that a truly protective standard is issued.
  Following the overturning of the Clinton Administration's proposed 
ergonomics regulation by Congress in 2001, I expected the Department of 
Labor to issue a new rule to protect our Nation's workers. Rather than 
implement a new standard, however, the Department unveiled an 
ergonomics plan on April 5, 2002, that calls for voluntary industry 
guidelines, enforcement measures, and workplace outreach. I have 
concern that such an approach adequately addresses the safety of our 
Nation's workforce.
  I voted in favor of the Joint Resolution of Disapproval of the 
proposed ergonomics standard because I had concerns over its potential 
cost and complexity. Last year, as Chairman of the Labor, Health and 
Human Services and Education Appropriations Subcommittee, I held two 
hearings on this contentious matter where I heard from witnesses on 
both sides of the debate. They testified that the potential costs of 
the rule ranged from $4.5 billion to as much as $1 trillion. There was 
also considerable disagreement over whether the regulation needed to be 
as complex as it was. I came away from these hearings with the 
conclusion that there was a need for promoting worker safety. But I was 
also concerned as to whether the entire matter ought to be 
substantially simpler.
  I firmly believe that the best way to protect our Nation's workers 
from work-related musculoskeletal disorders and workplace hazards is 
for the Department of Labor to issue a new ergonomics standard, but one 
that is substantially simpler than the rule overturned last year. I had 
hoped that the Department would take action on its own to issue a new 
rule, and Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao left open this possibility 
in response to an inquiry I made prior to the ergonomics vote. She 
stated in a March 6, 2001, letter to me:

       Let me assure you that in the event a Joint Resolution of 
     Disapproval becomes law, I intend to pursue a comprehensive 
     approach to ergonomics which may include new rulemaking that 
     addresses the concerns levied against the current standard.

  The key word in her response was ``may,'' and I remain disappointed 
that the plan put forward by the Department of Labor does not include 
such a new rulemaking. For that reason, I believe it is important to 
press ahead with today's legislation.
 Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I am pleased to join as an 
original co-sponsor of S. 2184, which provides for reissuance by the 
Department of Labor of a rule to prevent repetitive stress injuries. 
Too much time has passed with too little action on what is acknowledged 
to be the most critical workplace safety issue we face. After a year of 
inaction and delay, it is clear that this Administration is not serious 
about protecting workers from repetitive stress injury hazards in the 
workplace. Congress must now step in and require the Department to act.
  This is a problem that affects countless numbers of workers. Each 
year, roughly 1.8 million workers suffer repetitive stress injuries on 
the job. That translates to 5000 injured workers a day, one worker 
injured every 18 seconds. Women suffer disproportionately from 
repetitive stress injuries. In particular, 67 percent of reported 
carpal tunnel cases and 61 percent of tendonitis cases are women, even 
though women comprise only 46 percent of the work force and account for 
only 33 percent of total workplace injuries.
  Notwithstanding the gravity of the problem, this Administration and 
its Republican allies in Congress saw fit to overturn the ten years of 
effort that went into developing an OSHA standard for protecting 
workers from repetitive stress injury hazards in the workplace. In its 
place, Secretary of Labor Chao and President Bush promised a 
``comprehensive plan'' to combat this serious workplace safety issue.
  Yet after months of delays and inaction, what the Department of Labor 
has now produced is a sham. It's emphasis on voluntariness, toothless 
enforcement, and unnecessary and duplicative research in my view turns 
the clock back to before the first Bush Administration when Secretary 
of Labor Lynn Martin initiated the repetitive stress injury rulemaking 
proceeding.
  Voluntary approaches alone have not protected workers from repetitive 
stress injuries. OSHA itself reports that only 16 percent of employers 
in general industry have put in place ergonomic programs to reduce 
hazards. Each year 1.8 million workers suffer repetitive stress 
injuries and recent Bureau of Labor Statistics reports show that injury 
numbers and rates are increasing, particularly in high risk industries 
and occupations.
  We have been as patient as possible with this Administration, but it 
is clear that they have no intention of addressing this problem in a 
serious manner. Time is running out for the millions of workers at risk 
of repetitive stress injury. Congress must act now. And we must act 
decisively.
  The bill we introduce today is a balanced approach to fashioning a 
repetitive stress injury standard that will benefit all workers. In 
particular it requires the Department of Labor to issue, within two 
years, a standard for addressing work-related repetitive stress 
injuries and workplace ergonomic hazards. The bill requires the new 
standard to describe in clear terms when an employer is required to 
take action, what actions the employer must take, and when an employer 
is in compliance with the standard. Under the bill's terms the new 
standard must emphasize prevention and cover workers at risk only where 
measures exist to control the hazards that are both economically and 
technologically feasible. The standard must be based on the best 
available evidence and employer experience with effective practices. 
Finally, the bill clarifies that the new rule cannot expand the 
application of state workers' compensation laws, it requires the 
Department of Labor to issue information and training materials, and 
provides the Department with authority and flexibility to issue an 
appropriate standard.
  In sum, this bill represents a balanced and comprehensive approach to 
dealing with the most serious workplace safety issue we face. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this measure. Action on the issue 
of repetitive stress injury is long overdue.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CLELAND:
  S. 2185. A bill to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 
of 1974 to provide workers with individual account plans with 
information on how the assets in their accounts are invested and of the 
need to diversify the investment of the assets; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
 Mr. CLELAND. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill 
designed to promote investor education. The collapse of Enron has left 
Congress searching for answers as to how such a disaster

[[Page 4890]]

could have happened and how it can be prevented from happening in the 
future. I serve on both the Commerce and Governmental Affairs 
Committees which are investigating Enron and a central concept I have 
taken away from these investigations is the importance of ensuring that 
investors have adequate and current information regarding their 
retirement plans. Employees need to be armed with knowledge in order to 
protect themselves and their hard earned retirement savings.
  My bill would require that employee investors in company 401(k) plans 
receive quarterly reports detailing the contents of their 401(k) plans. 
Under current law, employers are only required to provide annual 
reports with a statement of benefits accrued under the plan. Enron 
certainly illustrates what a difference a year makes. Employees should 
have timely access to information about their 401(k) plan, enabling 
them to make choices in their investments. My bill would require that 
employees receive quarterly reports with a specific listing of: 1. the 
fair market value of the assets of each investment option; 2. the 
percentage of plan investment in each asset; and 3. the percentage of 
investments in employer securities and how much of that investment came 
from employee contributions.
  My bill would also require that quarterly reports contain a ``warning 
label'' informing employees of the potential danger of investing too 
heavily in employer stock. I believe that employees should have the 
ability to choose how to invest and diversify their own 401(k) plan. 
However, I also believe employees should be able to make informed 
choices. Providing employees with the basic information that investing 
too heavily in any one security, including their own company stock, 
violates commonly accepted investing principles is simple common sense. 
Thus, my bill requires that a warning label be provided to employees 
upon enrollment in a plan and included in quarterly reports that reads: 
Under commonly accepted principles of good investment advice, a 
retirement account should be invested in a broadly diversified 
portfolio of stocks and bonds. It is unwise for employees to hold 
significant concentrations of employer stock in an account that is 
meant for retirement savings.
  We may not be able to prevent company executives from lying, cheating 
and stealing like the executives of Enron, though we should ensure a 
climate of strict enforcement to deter such behavior. However, we can 
arm employees with the information and tools to protect themselves and 
their retirement savings. 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. 2185

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

     SECTION 1. INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNT PLANS REQUIRED TO GIVE 
                   PARTICIPANTS ADEQUATE INFORMATION TO ASSIST 
                   THEM IN DIVERSIFYING PENSION ASSETS.

       (a) In General.--Section 104 of the Employee Retirement 
     Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1024) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections 
     (d) and (e), respectively, and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c)(1) The plan administrator of an applicable individual 
     account plan shall, within a reasonable period of time 
     following the close of each calendar quarter, provide to each 
     participant or beneficiary a statement with respect to his or 
     her individual account which includes--
       ``(A) the fair market value as of the close of such quarter 
     of the assets in the account in each investment option,
       ``(B) the percentage as of such calendar quarter of assets 
     which each investment option is of the total assets in the 
     account,
       ``(C) the percentage of the investment in employer 
     securities which came from employer contributions other than 
     elective deferrals (and earnings thereon) and which came from 
     employee contributions and elective deferrals (and earnings 
     thereon), and
       ``(D) such other information as the Secretary may 
     prescribe.
       ``(2)(A) Each statement shall also include a separate 
     statement which is prominently displayed and which reads as 
     follows:
       `Under commonly accepted principles of good investment 
     advice, a retirement account should be invested in a broadly 
     diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds. It is unwise for 
     employees to hold significant concentrations of employer 
     stock in an account that is meant for retirement savings'.
       ``(B) The plan administrator of an applicable individual 
     account plan shall provide the separate statement described 
     in subparagraph (A) to an individual at the time the 
     individual first becomes a participant in the plan.
       ``(3) Any statement or notice under this subsection shall 
     be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the 
     average plan participant.
       ``(4) For purposes of this subsection--
       ``(A) The term `applicable individual account plan' means 
     an individual account plan to which section 404(c)(1) 
     applies.
       ``(B) The term `elective deferrals' has the meaning given 
     such term by section 402(g)(3) of such Code.
       ``(C) The term `employer securities' has the meaning given 
     such term by section 407(d)(1).''
       (b) Enforcement.--Section 502(c)(1) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 
     1132(c)(1)) is amended by striking ``or section 101(e)(1)'' 
     and inserting ``, section 101(e)(1), or section 104(c)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to calendar quarters beginning on and after 
     January 1, 2003.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (by request):
  S. 2186. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a 
new Assistant Secretary to perform operations, preparedness, security 
and law enforcement functions, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs.
 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation 
requested by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, as a courtesy to the 
Secretary and the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA. Except in unusual 
circumstances, it is my practice to introduce legislation requested by 
the Administration so that such measures will be available for review 
and consideration.
  This ``by-request'' bill would allow VA to create an office, directed 
by an Assistant Secretary, to address operations, preparedness, 
security, and law enforcement functions. With the increased focus on 
homeland security has come increased emphasis on the role that VA is 
expected to play in providing medical care to veterans, active duty 
military personnel, and civilians during disasters. In order to improve 
emergency preparedness without sacrificing its primary mission, caring 
for the Nation's veterans, the Secretary has proposed creating an 
Office of Operations, Security, and Preparedness to help coordinate 
preparedness strategies, both within VA and with other Federal, State, 
and local agencies.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and Secretary 
Principi's transmittal letter that accompanied the draft legislation be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2186

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Department of 
     Veterans Affairs Reorganization Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. REFERENCES TO TITLE 38, UNITED STATES CODE.

       Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this 
     Act an amendment is expressed in terms of an amendment to a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of title 38, 
     United States Code.

     SEC. 3. INCREASE THE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED ASSISTANT 
                   SECRETARIES; REVISION OF FUNCTIONS.

       Section 308 is amended:
       (a) in subsection (a) by substituting ``seven'' for ``six'' 
     in the first sentence.
       (b) by adding to the end of subsection (b) the following 
     new paragraph (11):
       ``(11) Operations, preparedness, security and law 
     enforcement functions.''

     SEC. 4. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE.

       Section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     changing ``Assistant Secretaries, Department of Veterans 
     Affairs (6)'' to ``Assistant Secretaries, Department of 
     Veterans Affairs (7)''.
                                  ____



                            The Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

                                       Washington, April 12, 2002.
     Hon. Richard B. Cheney,
     President of the Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: There is transmitted herein a draft 
     bill ``To amend title 38, United

[[Page 4891]]

     States Code, to increase the number of certain Officers to 
     perform operations, preparedness, security and law 
     enforcement functions, and for other purposes.'' We request 
     that it be referred to the appropriate committee for prompt 
     consideration and enactment.
       America has entered into an extended war against terrorism 
     in which the front lines include the home front as well as 
     the foreign battlefield. The tragic events of September 11, 
     2001, served as a reminder that terrorists are willing and 
     able to attack our civilian population, our centers for 
     military command and control, and our economic system. The 
     anthrax attacks that surfaced during October underscored our 
     nation's vulnerability to asymmetric attacks.
       National Defense and Homeland Security Offices project that 
     terrorist attacks on the United States will continue. 
     Terrorists may use any lethal means against domestic targets, 
     including chemical, biological, radiological, or kinetic 
     devices. Moreover, we can assume that terrorists and other 
     entities supporting terrorists may use chemical or biological 
     weapons against U.S. military members engaged in combat 
     operations. VA must anticipate military casualties in numbers 
     or of a type that could tax the Department of Defense (DOD) 
     medical system. Additionally, the United States can expect 
     terrorists to attempt to degrade our national infrastructure 
     by any means available to them, including sabotage and cyber 
     warfare.
       Congress has assigned to the Department of Veterans Affairs 
     statutory functions for response to terrorist attacks and 
     other emergencies and disasters, that are especially 
     challenging, particularly when compared with those of some 
     other executive branch agencies. The statutory functions 
     include the duty to provide medical services to military 
     personnel referred in time of war by the Department of 
     Defense; responsibilities in four emergency support 
     functions, as tasked under the Federal Response Plan by the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency under the Stafford Act; 
     and the role of providing care to members of the community 
     during emergencies on a humanitarian basis.
       We can properly perform these responsibilities, however, 
     only in a way that ensures the effective continuity of VA's 
     primary mission of serving veterans.
       The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA or the Department) 
     has emerged from the events of the past few months with a 
     heightened commitment to our statutory roles as a key support 
     agency for disaster response and mitigation, including 
     response to the use of nuclear, chemical, or biological 
     weapons of mass destruction (WMD), as well as its traditional 
     Federal Response Plan roles. Since September 11, VA has 
     joined with other Federal agencies in greatly expanded inter-
     agency work. The necessary time commitment will expand 
     further as the Homeland Security Council (HSC), Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Health and 
     Human Services (HHS), and Department of Defense (DoD) 
     programs become fully operational and expand, and VA is asked 
     to provide additional support.
       In response, VA is reorganizing certain of its elements in 
     order to best meet its responsibility to protect veterans, 
     employees, and visitors to its facilities, to assure the 
     continuity of veterans' services, while at the same time 
     providing enhanced emergency preparedness and planning. These 
     responsibilities, which in recent months have become even 
     more imperative, belong to VA as a whole. They thus transcend 
     the Administrations and the staff offices. To help ensure the 
     Department as a whole meets these broad responsibilities, VA 
     needs a separate, and a separately accountable, coordinating 
     and policymaking entity. This reorganization creates a new 
     Office of Operations, Security & Preparedness (OSP) to carry 
     out Operations, Preparedness, Security and Law Enforcement 
     functions. VA's experiences during the last several months of 
     increased emergency management activities demonstrate that 
     OSP requirements are full-time activities for an Assistant 
     Secretary. In order to provide appropriate leadership and 
     accountability, the reorganization places OSP under a new 
     Assistant Secretary. Executive Branch requirements, as well 
     as the strategic and day-to-day requirements of OSP are 
     significant and require a full-time Assistant Secretary to 
     provide the necessary level of executive representation and 
     leadership and to meet time demands.
       To support the establishment of this new organization, this 
     draft bill would amend section 308 of title 38, United States 
     Code, to increase the number of Assistant Secretaries from 
     six to seven and would add Operations, Preparedness, Security 
     and Law Enforcement functions to the functions and duties to 
     be assigned to the Assistant Secretaries.
       The proposed OSP will enable the Department and its three 
     administrations--Veterans Health Administration (VHA), 
     Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), and National Cemetery 
     Administration (NCA)--to operate more cohesively in this new, 
     uncertain environment, and will help assure continuity of 
     operations in the event of an emergency situation. OSP will:
       (a) Ensure that operational readiness and emergency 
     preparedness activities enhance VA's ability to continue its 
     ongoing services (Continuity of Operations);
       (b) Coordinate and execute emergency preparedness and 
     crisis response activities both VA-wide and with other 
     Federal, State, local and relief agencies;
       (c) Develop and maintain an effective working relationship 
     with the newly established US Office of Homeland Security and 
     reinforce existing relationships with the Department of 
     Defense (DOD), Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
     Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention, Department of Justice, and other 
     agencies actively involved in continuity of government, 
     counter-terrorism and homeland defense;
       (d) Ensure enforcement of the law and oversee the 
     protection of employees and veterans using VA facilities 
     while ensuring the physical security of VA's infrastructure;
       (e) Evaluate preparedness programs and develop Department-
     wide training programs that enhance VA's readiness and 
     exercises.
       The creation of this new organization will shift 
     responsibility for emergency preparedness, continuity of 
     operations, continuity of government, law enforcement, 
     physical security, and personnel security programs from the 
     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and 
     Administration (HR&A) to OSP. The Office of Security & Law 
     Enforcement (S&LE) will be transferred from HR&A to OSP. In 
     addition, all or part of the following functions and offices 
     will transfer from VHA's Emergency Management Strategic 
     Healthcare Group (EMSHG) to OSP: DOD contingency support, 
     National Disaster Medical System, and Federal Response Plan.
       The reorganization establishing OSP would create a 
     standing, around-the-clock readiness operations capability to 
     monitor potential and ongoing situations of concern to the 
     Department and its administrators. It would create a more 
     resourced and focused approach to coordinating and executing 
     the Department's missions to respond as a key support agency 
     in national emergencies and to provide contingency support to 
     DOD in time of war.
       This proposed organization would have the capability to 
     meet both ongoing and projected operations center 
     requirements, while providing sufficient personnel to address 
     Departmental planning and policy development needs, and to 
     conduct ongoing training and evaluation at the Departmental 
     level. In addition, OSP would help the Department address 
     growing inter-agency cooperation responsibilities, much of 
     which is required to support the Homeland Security Council.
       The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there 
     is no objection from the standpoint of the Administration's 
     program to the submission of this proposed legislation to the 
     Congress.
           Sincerely yours,
                                      Anthony J. Principi.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself and Mr. Akaka):
  S. 2187. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code to authorize 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to furnish health care during a major 
disaster or medical emergency, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs.
 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I introduce legislation today 
to highlight, and acknowledge in law, a mission that already exists in 
fact: VA's role in offering health care and support to individuals 
affected by disasters. I am pleased to be joined in offering this 
legislation by my colleague on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator 
Daniel Akaka.
  VA's first, and most familiar, three missions include caring for our 
Nation's veterans, training future health care personnel, and fostering 
scientific and clinical research to improve future medical care. In 
1982, Congress assigned to VA a fourth mission: serving as the primary 
medical back-up system to the Department of Defense during times of war 
or domestic emergencies. If necessary, VA estimates that it could make 
about 3200 beds available immediately, and about 5500 beds within 72 
hours, to care for injured troops.
  VA has expanded this Fourth Mission to encompass a much greater share 
of the Federal responsibility for public health during crises beyond 
caring for active duty military casualties. VA also serves as a 
supporting agency in the Federal Response Plan for domestic disasters, 
as a cornerstone of the National Medical Disaster System, and by 
managing the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile. Through these programs, 
VA provides personnel, supplies and medications, facilities, and, if 
necessary, direct patient care to communities whose resources have been 
overwhelmed by medical crises.
  VA conducts large-scale disaster training exercises with its military

[[Page 4892]]

partners, cooperates with other agencies to staff emergency medical 
teams during high-profile public events, and can deploy its group of 
experts in radiological medicine anywhere in the United States within a 
day. VA's mental health care professionals offer expertise in post-
traumatic stress disorder counseling that is unparalleled anywhere in 
the world.
  VA has responded to every major domestic disaster of the last two 
decades, including the Oklahoma City attack, and Hurricanes Andrew and 
Floyd, by sharing skilled medical staff and supplies with community 
caregivers. Following catastrophic flooding in Houston last year, the 
local VA medical center remained the only area hospital with power, and 
its staff extended care to rescue workers and the public. On September 
11, VA physicians cared for at least 68 injured individuals in New 
York, and VA coordinators identified more than half of the 20,000 beds 
that would have been available for the care of victims in New York and 
Virginia through VA's community hospital partnerships. In the weeks 
following the terrorist attacks, VA continued to provide skilled 
medical specialists, including mental health professionals, to care for 
rescue workers and servicemembers in New York and at the Pentagon.
  The legislation that we introduce today would confer no new 
responsibilities or missions upon VA, but would recognize VA's already 
enormous contribution to public safety and emergency preparedness. As 
Congress continues to prepare for the threat of terrorism, it becomes 
increasingly important to focus not only the public health community, 
but those capable of providing medical care during mass casualty 
events.
  As the largest health care system in the nation, VA medical centers 
can and will offer invaluable services during a public health care 
emergency, whether that emergency is terrorism or a natural disaster. 
When VA health care providers are called upon to care for disaster 
victims, they serve not only as part of the Federal response to 
emergencies, but as part of the communities in which they live. This 
legislation would extend the Congressional mandate calling upon VA to 
provide care for active duty military personnel during a disaster to 
recognize VA's contribution to general public safety during crises. I 
urge my colleagues in the Senate to join Senator Akaka and me in 
supporting this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2187

       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 ``Department of Veterans 
     Affairs Emergency Medical Care Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO FURNISH HEALTH CARE DURING MAJOR 
                   DISASTERS AND MEDICAL EMERGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Subchapter II of chapter 17 of title 
     38, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     1711 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 1711A. Care and services during major disasters and 
       medical emergencies

       ``(a) During and immediately following a disaster or 
     emergency referred to in subsection (b), the Secretary may 
     furnish hospital care and medical services to individuals 
     responding to, involved in, or otherwise affected by such 
     disaster or emergency, as the case may be.
       ``(b) A disaster or emergency referred to in this 
     subsection is any disaster or emergency as follows:
       ``(1) A major disaster or emergency declared by the 
     President under the Robert B. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).
       ``(2) A disaster or emergency in which the National 
     Disaster Medical System is activated.
       ``(c) The Secretary may furnish care and services under 
     this section to veterans without regard to their enrollment 
     in the system of annual patient enrollment under section 1705 
     of this title.
       ``(d) The Secretary may give a higher priority to the 
     furnishing of care and services under this section than to 
     the furnishing of care and services to any other group of 
     persons eligible for care and services in medical facilities 
     of the Department with the exception of--
       ``(1) veterans with service-connected disabilities; and
       ``(2) members of the Armed Forces on active duty who are 
     furnished health-care services under section 8111A of this 
     title.
       ``(e)(1) The cost of any care or services furnished under 
     this section to an officer or employee of a department or 
     agency of the Federal Government other than the Department 
     shall be reimbursed at such rates as may be agreed upon by 
     the Secretary and the head of such department or agency based 
     on the cost of the care or service furnished.
       ``(2) Amounts received by the Department under this 
     subsection shall be credited to the funds allotted to the 
     Department facility that furnished the care or services 
     concerned.
       ``(f) Within 60 days of the commencement of a disaster or 
     emergency referred to in subsection (b) in which the 
     Secretary furnishes care and services under this section (or 
     as soon thereafter as is practicable), the Secretary shall 
     submit to the Committees on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate 
     and the House of Representatives a report on the Secretary's 
     allocation of facilities and personnel in order to furnish 
     such care and services.
       ``(g) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations governing 
     the exercise of the authority of the Secretary under this 
     section.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of that chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     1711 the following new item:

``1711A. Care and services during major disasters and medical 
              emergencies.''.

       (b) Exception from Requirement for Charges for Emergency 
     Care.--Section 1711(b) of that title is amended by striking 
     ``The Secretary'' and inserting ``Except as provided in 
     section 1711A of this title with respect to a disaster or 
     emergency covered by that section, the Secretary''.
       (c) Members of the Armed Forces.--Subsection (a) of section 
     8111A of that title is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a)(1) During and immediately following a period of war, 
     or a period of national emergency declared by the President 
     or Congress that involves the use of the Armed Forces in 
     armed conflict, the Secretary may furnish hospital care, 
     nursing home care, and medical services to members of the 
     Armed Forces on active duty.
       ``(2)(A) During and immediately following a disaster or 
     emergency referred to in subparagraph (B), the Secretary may 
     furnish hospital care and medical services to members of the 
     Armed Forces on active duty responding to or involved in such 
     disaster or emergency, as the case may be.
       ``(B) A disaster or emergency referred to in this 
     subparagraph is any disaster or emergency follows:
       ``(i) A major disaster or emergency declared by the 
     President under the Robert B. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).
       ``(ii) A disaster or emergency in which the National 
     Disaster Medical System is activated.
       ``(3) The Secretary may give a higher priority to the 
     furnishing of care and services under this section than to 
     the furnishing of care and services to any other group of 
     persons eligible for care and services in medical facilities 
     of the Department with the exception of veterans with 
     service-connected disabilities.
       ``(4) In this section, the terms `hospital care', `nursing 
     home care', and `medical services' have the meanings given 
     such terms by sections 1701(5), 101(28), and 1701(6) of this 
     title, respectively.''.
 Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor the 
legislation offered by the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Rockefeller, 
to authorize the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, existing emergency 
preparedness activities.
  Currently, VA participates in the National Disaster Medical System, 
NDMS, and the Federal Response Plan through VA's Fourth Mission, 
mandated by Congress in 1982 to establish VA's role as the medical 
back-up to the military during conflicts. When VA has offered medical 
care to the general public during every major U.S. disaster since 
Hurricane Andrew, it has done so without the statutory authority to 
care for non-veterans and non-active-duty military personnel. The VA 
Emergency Medical Care Act of 2002 would give this authority.
  Already an active participant in disaster response and preparedness, 
VA partners with the Departments of Defense and Health and Human 
Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, to form the 
National Disaster Medical System, NDMS. The Act would codify and 
authorize VA's existing efforts to provide health care to the general 
public following activation of the NDMS.
  VA is an emergency responder through the Federal Response Plan, a

[[Page 4893]]

signed agreement between 27 Federal agencies and the Red Cross that 
coordinates Federal assistance when State and local resources are 
overwhelmed by a major disaster. VA serves as a support agency for four 
of the Emergency Support Functions outlined in the Federal Response 
Plan, including Mass Care and Health and Medical Services. VA is also 
the principle provider of mental health services to disaster survivors.
  I commend the work done by VA employees in responding to national 
emergencies. Because of their dedication and initiative, this 
legislation does not create new VA programs nor authorize any 
additional funds. I urge my colleagues to support the Department of 
Veterans Affairs Emergency Medical Care Act of 2002. This legislation 
is a first step in acknowledging the work that VA performs now to help 
all Americans respond to major disasters and medical crises.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BREAUX (for himself and Mr. Burns):
  S. 2188. A bill to require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to 
amend its flammability standards for children's sleepwear under the 
Flammable Fabrics Act; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
 Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, today, along with Senator Burns, I 
am introducing the Children's Safe Sleepwear and Burn Prevention Act of 
2002. This legislation is designed to prevent sleepwear-related burn 
injuries and reverse the 1997 decision of the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission on children's sleepwear safety regulations.
  In 1996, the CPSC made two principle changes to the sleepwear safety 
regulations. First, the Commission determined that because children age 
0-9 months were not mobile, they were not at risk from fire. 
Consequently, the revised regulations totally exempted sleepwear for 
young infants from any safety regulations. Second, the CPSC decided 
that so-called ``tight-fitting'' sleepwear did not have to meet any 
fire safety requirements on the mistaken assumption that tight-fitting 
garments do not burn.
  As a result of the Commission's action, I heard from the Shriners 
Hospital in Shreveport, Louisiana. The Shirners Hospitals for children 
operate four burn centers in the United States and treat over 20 
percent of all serious pediatric burns in the country. The Shriners 
Hospitals conducted a study comparing the incidence of sleepwear-
related burn injuries during the period 1995-1996, before the 
regulations were changed, to the period 1998-1999 after the changes had 
been put in place.
  The results of the Shriners study are sobering indeed. From 1995-
1996, Shriners Hospitals treated 14 children for sleepwear-related burn 
injuries. For the period 1998-1999, the number of children suffering 
from these sleepwear-related burns increased to 36, a 157 percent 
increase!
  The Shriners Hospitals also examined pediatric burn injuries where it 
was impossible to determine the exact type of clothing involved or 
where the children was not technically wearing sleepwear but may have 
been using this clothing to sleep in. Over the relevant time period, 
the number of children suffering clothing-related burn injuries 
increased from 70 to 147, a 110 percent increase! Similarly, the number 
of pediatric burn injuries where it was impossible to determine 
anything about the clothing being worn because the clothing had been 
totally burned away increased from 218 to 311, a 43 percent increase! 
All told, the number of burned children treated at Shriners Hospitals 
increased from 302 in 1995-1996 to 494 in 1998-1999, a 64 percent 
increase!
  The data regarding infants age 0-9 months is also revealing. In 1995-
1996 Shriners Hospitals treated just five children for sleepwear-
related burn injuries under nine months of age. For 1998-1999, the 
total number of infants suffering such injuries rose to nineteen, a 280 
percent increase!
  As a practical matter, almost all pediatric burn injuries involve 
ignition of the clothing and some other materials. While the safety 
regulations cannot save a child trapped in a raging inferno, a 1972 HEW 
study concluded that children in fires whose clothing ignited had a 
four to six-fold increase in mortality and morbidity compared to those 
who clothing did not ignite. Take, for example, a situation where the 
house is on fire and a parent picks up her infants and flees the 
burning house. Sparks are flying, but the infants garments do not 
ignite because they are flame resistent. If the sleepwear is not flame 
resistant, the sparks catch the clothing.
  The Children's Safe Sleepwear and Burn Prevention Act directs the 
Commission to restore the safety protections that it removed in 1997. 
Henceforth, young infants will not have to face the dangers of using 
sleepwear that provides no protection whatsoever against fire. Tight-
fitting or snug sleepwear will also have to meet these fire safety 
requirements. There is, however, more that must be done to ensure a 
fire safety environment for our children.
  Another problem regarding the children's sleepwear regulations must 
be addressed. Under the CPSC's regulations, even the pre-1997 version, 
clothing that the manufacturer did not intend to be used as sleepwear 
were not required to meet the flammability safety requirements. 
Consequently, a manufacturer could simply label an item as day wear as 
sleepwear and completely avoid the safety requirements.
  This legislation eliminates this ``labeling loophole'' by creating a 
functional definition of sleepwear for children up to seven years of 
age. If, as a practical matter, clothing is used for sleepwear, then 
should meet the safety requirements. The legislation provides some 
guidance as to what types of garments are used for sleepwear with some 
regularity such as togs, bunny suits and garments with cartoon 
characters that are particularly attractive to young children.
  One might ask what alternatives are there to untreated cotton. 
Advances in technology now provide such alternatives. Cotton can be 
treated with a flame retardant that does not wash out because it is 
bonded to the cotton through a chemical process at the atomic level. 
The treatment adds little to the cost of children's sleepwear.
  The defense of our innocent children from the dangers of sleepwear 
related burn injuries should be a priority. If you have ever seen a 
child severely burned by flaming sleepwear, you have some sense of the 
suffering and horror that these injuries entail. We can make these 
horrible burn injuries less frequent by enacting this important piece 
of legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2188

       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 ``Children's Safe Sleepwear 
     and Burn Prevention Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO CHILDREN'S SLEEPWEAR FLAMMABILITY 
                   REGULATIONS.

       (a) In General.--The Consumer Product Safety Commission (in 
     this Act referred to as the ``Commission'') shall, with 
     respect to the Commission's flammability standards for 
     children's sleepwear sizes 0 through 14, promulgated pursuant 
     to the Flammable Fabrics Act (15 U.S.C. 1191 et seq.; parts 
     1615 and 1616 of title 16, Code of Federal Regulations)--
       (1) not enforce or enact a standard with respect to 
     children's sleepwear that--
       (A) exempts--
       (i) diapers and underwear (including disposable diapers and 
     underwear);
       (ii) infant garments sizes 0 through 6X, infant garments 
     sizes 9 months or smaller, or other garments described in 
     part 1615.1(c) of title 16, Code of Federal Regulations; or
       (iii) tight-fitting garments; or
       (B) includes as a part of any definition of children's 
     sleepwear (or of any item of such sleepwear) a standard based 
     on the intent of the manufacturer or retailer; and
       (2) provide a functional definition of children's sleepwear 
     for ages 0 through 7 years (encompassing, at a minimum, 
     infant and children's garment sizes 2 through 6X, as such 
     sizes are defined by the Department of Commerce Voluntary 
     Product Standard (previously identified as Commercial 
     Standard

[[Page 4894]]

     CS151-50 ``Body Measurements for the Sizing of Apparel for 
     Infants, Babies, Toddlers, and Children''), including 
     children's clothing used with some regularity as sleepwear, 
     such as--
       (A) ``togs'';
       (B) ``onesies'';
       (C) body suits with snaps at the bottom for easy access to 
     a diaper;
       (D) all-in-one ``bunny'' suits with enclosed feet; and
       (E) any garments sized for children ages 0 through 7 years 
     with cartoon characters or symbols that the Commission finds 
     are particularly attractive to young children.
       (b) Rulemaking.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Commission shall promulgate regulations with 
     respect to the flammability of children's sleepwear 
     consistent with the provisions of this Act.
       (c) Effective Date.--Sleepwear manufactured or imported on 
     or before the effective date of the regulations promulgated 
     by the Commission under subsection (b) shall not be treated 
     as being in violation of the Flammable Fabrics Act or such 
     regulations if the sleepwear complied with the rules of the 
     Commission in effect at the time the sleepwear was 
     manufactured or imported.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Daschle, Mr. 
        Wellstone, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Dayton, 
        and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 2189. A bill to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to remedy certain 
effects of injurious steel imports by protecting benefits of steel 
industry retirees and encouraging the strengthening of the American 
steel industry; to the Committee on Finance.
 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, the American steel industry 
will not consolidate and will not survive without relief from their 
unique burden of substantial retiree health care costs. Failing to 
assist the American steel industry with its retiree health care costs 
puts our industry at a tremendous disadvantage as it competes in the 
world markets. If we are to have a competitive, viable industry, we 
must not shirk our responsibility. In the case of steel in America, 
that means three things: tariffs under Section 201, as is provided for 
under our trade laws; legacy, retiree health, relief; and effective 
consolidation of the steel industry.
  Earlier this year, the President imposed limited and temporary steel 
tariffs under Section 201. Today, I introduce the Steel Industry 
Consolidation and Retiree Benefits Protection Act of 2002, the Steel 
Legacy bill. This bill provides strong incentives for consolidation in 
the United States steel industry by supporting companies' retiree 
health care costs. This bill provides desperately needed medical care 
to retirees whose companies have been forced out of business by 
imports. This bill is critical to the preservation of the American 
steel industry, and it is humane to those individuals who have paid a 
very high price for our nation's free trade policies.
  The American steel industry has been facing an unprecedented crisis 
since 1997, when the Asian financial crisis disrupted global steel 
trade and diverted much of the world's excess steel capacity to the 
U.S. market. Thirty-three U.S. steel companies, representing over 40 
percent of domestic steelmaking capacity, have gone into bankruptcy 
since 1999, including such venerable names as Bethlehem Steel and LTV. 
Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel in my state is in the process of 
reorganizing. Many more steel companies have been forced into 
liquidation. Almost 50,000 steelmaking jobs have been lost in this 
country since the steel crisis began in 1998--losses that come on top 
of hundreds of thousands of steel job losses in the two preceding 
decades.
  The cause of this crisis in the industry is not that demand for steel 
has suddenly collapsed or that the competitiveness of the American 
steel industry has suddenly collapsed, but because foreign steelmakers 
have enjoyed decades of government subsidies and protection. Those 
foreign subsidies have created massive global steel overcapacity, and 
that foreign protection has ensured that most of the world's 
overcapacity has been directed at the U.S. market, which has been the 
most open major market in the world.
  The crisis our steel industry currently faces could well mean the end 
of steelmaking in the United States. This would have grave consequences 
for steel companies and steel workers, for the steel communities that 
depend on them, and for our nation's industrial base and our national 
defense. In recognition that this could not be allowed to happen, the 
President announced last month that he would impose temporary Section 
201 tariff measures on some steel imports. These measures will help 
give the U.S. steel industry some breathing room to recover. I commend 
the President for recognizing the importance of maintaining a domestic 
steel manufacturing base and for taking these steps.
  Still, I think it's essential to realize that the Section 201 
measures are limited in their scope and duration: first, the tariffs 
range from 8 percent to 30 percent, far less than the level recommended 
by two of the ITC Commissioners and the level that I and many others in 
the steel industry had argued for. And these tariffs are lowered 
dramatically each year, and stop after only three years. The tariffs do 
not apply to all steel products. Because of this, foreign steel 
companies will be able to engage in circumvention measures to get 
around the tariffs, as they have with antidumping measures. Under the 
201 relief, tariffs were imposed on some grades of steel, others were 
exempted altogether, numerous exemptions for specific steel products 
have been issued, and for the critical category of slab, a tariff rate 
quota has been imposed that is unlikely to have any positive effect 
whatsoever. The tariffs are not being applied across the board to all 
foreign steel producers; the relief exempts all steel from developing 
countries and from NAFTA members, who between them represent a 
significant portion, over a third, of overall U.S. steel imports.
  We knew from the beginning of the 201 process that even in the best 
of circumstances, it was clear that Section 201 tariffs were going to 
provide only part of the solution to help the domestic steel industry 
respond to this crisis. But the Section 201 remedy imposed, with its 
exclusions and exemptions and declining tariffs, makes the need for 
additional measures even more compelling.
  Section 201 will slow the tide of imports. But it will not resolve 
the other critical issues that will determine whether America's 
integrated steelmaking capacity survives. America's integrated 
steelmakers face massive ``legacy costs'' for retiree health and 
pension benefits, stemming from the dramatic reduction in the American 
steel industry's active workforce over the past two decades, which in 
turn results from successive Administrations' inability to negotiate an 
agreement for foreign governments to stop subsidizing their 
steelmakers. These legacy costs both hurt American steel's 
international competitiveness and serve as a liability that has 
prevented the consolidation of the fragmented domestic steel industry. 
Industry consolidation is another issue that must be addressed: with 
foreign steelmakers merging to create a new level of top tier 
steelmakers, American steelmakers risk being permanently consigned to 
the second rank, with sub-scale facilities and insufficient revenues to 
fund the necessary investment in research and technology. Finally, we 
must take measures to mitigate the human cost of this steel crisis, 
particularly the cost to retirees who worked long, hard years to earn 
health and pension benefits for themselves and their families, but now 
risk seeing all that taken away because the company that pays those 
benefits is threatened by unfair foreign trade practices.
  The bill I am introducing today, the Steel Industry Retiree Benefits 
Protection Act of 2002, addresses the toughest of these problems. It 
guarantees the health care coverage and a very limited life insurance 
benefit for steel industry retirees whose employer is acquired by 
another steelmaker or whose employer is forced to shut down because no 
other steelmaker will acquire it. This will ensure that in steel 
communities throughout the nation, no retirees will lose their critical 
health benefits simply because of a crisis in the global steel industry 
that our government failed to avert. Equally important, this bill will 
address retiree

[[Page 4895]]

legacy costs in a way that will enhance our steel industry's 
competitiveness, by clearing the way for the industry consolidation 
that is necessary and inevitable if the American steel industry is to 
survive.
  The mechanics of the bill are fairly simple. A Federal trust fund 
will be established that will assume the retirees' health care and life 
insurance costs for steel, iron ore, and coke producers, and those who 
transport steel mill products for steelmaking operations, that are 
acquired by another company; that are in bankruptcy and attempted 
unsuccessfully to be acquired by another company, and thus have been 
closed, or are in imminent danger of closing, or have been unable to be 
acquired for at least two years; that are in bankruptcy and sell a 
significant steelmaking operation to another company; or, finally, in 
order to ensure that the assumption of legacy costs does not distort 
competition within the domestic steel industry, if a significant 
portion of the entire industry's legacy costs have been assumed by the 
Federal trust fund, all steel industry retirees and beneficiaries would 
be eligible to be covered by the program.
  The money for the Fund to pay for these legacy costs will come from 
the following: steel tariff revenues; an acquired steelmaker's retiree 
health care trust fund assets; payments for 10 years by the qualified 
steel company of $5 per ton of steelmaking capacity, subject to the 
bill's provisions; retiree premiums; and, and appropriated funds if 
necessary.
  In order to simplify the management of the program, retiree health 
benefits assumed by the Fund will be limited to Federal Blue Cross/Blue 
Shield health benefits, a fair and reasonable standard of health 
coverage. Life insurance will be limited to a one-time payment of 
$5,000 dollars. The program will be administered by the Secretary of 
Commerce and by Trustees who are designated by both management and 
labor.
  This bill is supported by both the integrated steelmakers and by the 
steel unions, who understand what it will take to save the American 
steel industry. They know that legacy costs have been the major barrier 
to consolidation of the American steel market and that it is critical 
that we resolve that problem if we are to preserve retiree health 
benefits and an integrated domestic steel industry. I am introducing 
this legislation with my partner as Co-Chair of the Senate Steel 
Caucus, Senator Specter. We have a history of working together on 
issues that are vital to the core industries in our states and the 
workers who have helped fuel and build this nation. I am pleased that 
Senators Wellstone, Durbin, Mikulski, Sarbanes,  and Dayton, and the 
distinguished Senate Majority Leader, who have long been champions of 
retirees and workers health care issues, join me today as cosponsors. 
We have also worked in close consultation with our colleagues on the 
House side, especially members of the House Steel Caucus, who share our 
concern that these critical legacy cost issues be addressed.
  But, make no mistake, this steel legacy legislation will not happen 
without the active involvement of the President. This bill is fair, it 
is pro-competition, and there is a broad consensus that legacy cost 
legislation like this is absolutely necessary if we are to preserve 
integrated steelmaking in the United States, as well as the communities 
and businesses that depend on those facilities. But realistically, a 
program like this is only going to be enacted with the strong support 
and active engagement of the President.
  The President's announcement of his decision on Section 201 tariffs 
last month was an encouraging sign that the President was committed to 
the preservation of the American steel industry, and his recognition 
that, if equipped with the right tools and competing in a fair market, 
the domestic steel industry can regain its former role as the world's 
leader. I surely hope so. But I know that without President Bush's 
support for a legacy cost bill, the Section 201 tariffs he announced 
last month will not be enough, and we will witness the erosion of a 
vital national asset, the American steel industry.
  I appeal to the President to maintain his personal interest in the 
well-being of our steel industry. It is vital to our nation's economy 
and to our defense capability. I encourage the President to lead on 
this issue because surely, in these times, without his support and 
quick involvement, we will not be able to get a bill through this 
Congress. I hope the Administration will work with us here in the 
Senate to pass a legacy cost bill that will ensure fairness for 
America's retired steelworkers and a competitive future for America's 
integrated steel industry. We need legacy cost legislation like that 
outlined in the bill I am submitting today, if we are to preserve the 
U.S. steel industry. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this 
bill.
  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. 2189

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Steel 
     Industry Consolidation and Retiree Benefits Protection Act of 
     2002''.
       (b) Congressional Findings and Purpose.--
       (1) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (A) The United States Department of Commerce has documented 
     that American steelworkers and their employers have been 
     forced over the last 30 years to compete in a global steel 
     market in which foreign governments have engaged in market 
     distorting practices that to this day sustain enormous 
     overcapacity in world steel supplies.
       (B) The United States International Trade Commission, in 
     its recent investigation of steel imports to the United 
     States under section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974, has 
     concluded that surges of imported steel since the Asian 
     crisis of 1997 have caused serious injury to American 
     producers of most steel products.
       (C) Since 1997, 32 American steel companies have been 
     forced to seek bankruptcy protection, over 45,000 
     steelworkers have lost their jobs, and over 100,000 steel 
     retirees have suffered a complete cutoff of vital medical and 
     life insurance benefits.
       (D) Many steel industry retirees were forced into 
     retirement as a result of the restructurings of the 1980's 
     and 1990's, and then, as a second blow, recently lost their 
     retiree medical insurance.
       (E) Recent steel imports have pushed steel prices to such 
     record lows that surviving American steelmakers face imminent 
     financial collapse, and these firms employ over 185,000 
     workers in family-supporting jobs and provide crucial medical 
     coverage to hundreds of thousands of retirees and 
     beneficiaries.
       (F) As American steel companies continue to weaken or fail, 
     a very different trend is underway in other countries where 
     governments shoulder a substantial portion of retirement 
     costs and foreign steelmakers are now merging into companies 
     of unprecedented size and market influence.
       (G) If the American steel industry is to survive and 
     compete, it must transform itself from a group of relatively 
     small producers into a consolidated market force.
       (H) For many American steel companies, the ability to 
     consolidate is undermined by the burden of retiree health and 
     life insurance obligations.
       (2) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to ensure 
     that--
       (A) retired steelworkers receive medical and life insurance 
     coverage, and
       (B) the American steel industry can continue to provide 
     livelihoods to tens of thousands of American workers, their 
     families, and communities through the receipt of assistance 
     in consolidating its position in world steel markets.

     SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF STEEL INDUSTRY RETIREE BENEFITS 
                   PROTECTION PROGRAM.

       The Trade Act of 1974 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new title:

     ``TITLE IX--PROTECTION FOR STEEL INDUSTRY RETIREMENT BENEFITS

``Subtitle A. Definitions.
``Subtitle B. Steel Industry Retiree Benefits Protection Program.
``Subtitle C. Steel Industry Legacy Relief Trust Fund.

                       ``Subtitle A--Definitions

``Sec. 901. Definitions.

     ``SEC. 901. DEFINITIONS.

       ``(a) Terms Relating to Benefits Program.--For purposes of 
     this title--
       ``(1) Retiree benefits program.--The term `retiree benefits 
     program' means the Steel Industry Retiree Benefits Protection 
     Program established under this title to provide medical and 
     death benefits to eligible retirees and beneficiaries.

[[Page 4896]]

       ``(2) Steel retiree benefits.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `steel retiree benefits' means 
     medical, surgical, or hospital benefits, and death benefits, 
     whether furnished through insurance or otherwise, which are 
     provided to retirees and eligible beneficiaries in accordance 
     with an employee benefit plan (within the meaning of section 
     3(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) 
     which--
       ``(i) is established or maintained by a qualified steel 
     company or an applicable acquiring company, and
       ``(ii) is in effect on or after January 1, 2000.

     Such term includes benefits provided under a plan without 
     regard to whether the plan is established or maintained 
     pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement.
       ``(B) Retiree.--
       ``(i) In general.--The term `retiree' means an individual 
     who has met any years of service or disability requirements 
     under an employee benefit plan described in subparagraph (A) 
     which are necessary to receive steel retiree benefits under 
     the plan.
       ``(ii) Certain retirees included.--An individual shall not 
     fail to be treated as a retiree because the individual--

       ``(I) retired before January 1, 2000, or
       ``(II) was not employed at the steelmaking assets of a 
     qualified steel company.

       ``(b) Terms Relating to Steel Companies.--For purposes of 
     this title--
       ``(1) Qualified steel company.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified steel company' means 
     any person which on January 1, 2000, was engaged in--
       ``(i) the production or manufacture of a steel mill 
     product,
       ``(ii) the mining or processing of iron ore or beneficiated 
     iron ore products, or
       ``(iii) the production of coke for use in a steel mill 
     product.
       ``(B) Transportation.--The term `qualified steel company' 
     includes any person which on January 1, 2000, was engaged in 
     the transportation of any steel mill product solely or 
     principally for another person described in subparagraph (A), 
     but only if such person and such other person are related 
     persons.
       ``(C) Successors in interest.--The term `qualified steel 
     company' includes any successor in interest of a person 
     described in subparagraph (A) or (B).
       ``(2) Steelmaking assets and steel mill products.--
       ``(A) Steelmaking assets.--The term `steelmaking assets' 
     means any land, building, machinery, equipment, or other 
     fixed assets located in the United States which, at any time 
     on or after January 1, 2000, have been used in the activities 
     described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Steel mill product.--The term `steel mill product' 
     means any product defined by the American Iron and Steel 
     Institute as a steel mill product.
       ``(3) Acquiring company.--The term `acquiring company' 
     means any person which acquired on or after January 1, 2000, 
     steelmaking assets of a qualified steel company with respect 
     to which a qualifying event has occurred.
       ``(c) Other Definitions.--For purposes of this title--
       ``(1) Related person.--The term `related person' means, 
     with respect to any person, a person who--
       ``(A) is a member of the same controlled group of 
     corporations (within the meaning of section 52(a) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986) as such person, or
       ``(B) is under common control (within the meaning of 
     section 52(b) of such Code) with such person.
       ``(2) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce.
       ``(3) Trust fund.--The term `Trust Fund' means the Steel 
     Industry Legacy Relief Trust Fund established under subtitle 
     C.

    ``Subtitle B--Steel Industry Retiree Benefits Protection Program

``I. Establishment.
``II. Relief and assumption of liability, eligibility, and 
              certification.
``III. Program benefits.

                        ``PART I--ESTABLISHMENT

``Sec. 902. Establishment.

     ``SEC. 902. ESTABLISHMENT.

       ``There is established a Steel Industry Retiree Benefits 
     Protection program to be administered by the Secretary and 
     the Board of Trustees of the Trust Fund in accordance with 
     the provisions of this title for the purpose of providing 
     medical and death benefits to eligible retirees and eligible 
     beneficiaries certified as participants in the program under 
     part II.

    ``PART II--RELIEF AND ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY, ELIGIBILITY, AND 
                             CERTIFICATION

``Sec. 911. Relief and assumption of liability.
``Sec. 912. Qualifying events.
``Sec. 913. Eligibility and certification of eligibility.

     ``SEC. 911. RELIEF AND ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY.

       ``(a) In General.--If--
       ``(1) the Secretary certifies under section 912 that there 
     was a qualifying event with respect to a qualified steel 
     company,
       ``(2) the asset transfer requirements of subsection (b) are 
     met with respect to the qualifying event, and
       ``(3) the qualified steel company and any acquiring company 
     assumes their respective liability to make any contributions 
     required under subsection (c),

     then the United States shall assume liability for the 
     provision of steel retiree benefits for each eligible retiree 
     and eligible beneficiary certified for participation in the 
     retiree benefits program under section 913 (and the qualified 
     steel company, any predecessor or successor, and any related 
     person to such company, predecessor, or successor shall be 
     relieved of any liability for the provision of such 
     benefits). The United States shall be treated as satisfying 
     any liability assumed under this subsection if benefits are 
     provided to eligible retirees and eligible beneficiaries 
     under the retiree benefits program provided in part III.
       ``(b) Required Asset Transfers.--
       ``(1) In general.--The requirements of this subsection are 
     met if the qualified steel company and any applicable 
     acquiring company transfer to the Trust Fund all assets, as 
     determined in accordance with rules prescribed by the 
     Secretary, which, under the terms of an applicable collective 
     bargaining agreement, were required to be set aside under an 
     employee benefit plan or otherwise for the provision of the 
     steel retiree benefits the liability for which (determined 
     without regard to this subsection) is relieved by operation 
     of subsection (a). The assets required to be transferred 
     shall not include voluntary contributions, including 
     voluntary contributions made pursuant to a voluntary 
     employees beneficiary association trust, which are in excess 
     of the contributions described in the preceding sentence.
       ``(2) Determination.--The amount of the assets to be 
     transferred under paragraph (1) shall be determined at the 
     time of the certification under section 912 and shall include 
     interest from the time of the determination to the time of 
     transfer. Such amount shall be reduced by any payments from 
     such assets which are made after the determination by the 
     qualified steel company or applicable acquiring company for 
     the provision of steel retiree benefits for which such assets 
     were set aside and the liability for which (determined 
     without regard to this subsection) is relieved by operation 
     of subsection (a).
       ``(c) Contribution Requirements.--
       ``(1) Contributions based on ownership of steelmaking 
     assets.--
       ``(A) In general.--If there is a qualifying event certified 
     under section 912 with respect to a qualified steel company--
       ``(i) the qualified steel company shall assume the 
     obligation to pay, and
       ``(ii) if the qualified steel company transferred on or 
     after January 1, 2000, any of its steelmaking assets, the 
     qualified steel company and any acquiring company acquiring 
     such assets as part of (or after) a qualifying event shall 
     assume the obligation to pay,

     to the Trust Fund for each of the years in the 10-year period 
     beginning on the date of the qualifying event its ratable 
     share of the amount determined under subparagraph (B) with 
     respect to the steelmaking assets owned by such company or 
     person.
       ``(B) Amount of liability.--
       ``(i) In general.--The amount required to be paid under 
     subparagraph (A) for any year shall be equal to $5 per ton of 
     products described in section 901(b)(1)(A) attributable to 
     the steelmaking assets which are the subject of the 
     qualifying event and shipped to a person other than a related 
     person. If 2 or more persons own steelmaking capacity or 
     assets, the liability under this clause shall be allocated 
     ratably on the basis of their respective ownership interests. 
     The determination under this clause for any year shall be 
     made on the basis of shipments during the calendar year 
     preceding the calendar year in which such year begins.
       ``(ii) Reductions in liability.--The amount of any 
     liability under clause (i) for any year shall be reduced by 
     the amount of any assets transferred to the Trust Fund under 
     subsection (b), reduced by any portion of such amount applied 
     to a liability for any preceding year. If 2 or more persons 
     are liable under subparagraph (A) with respect to any 
     qualifying event, any reduction with respect to assets 
     transferred to the Trust Fund under subsection (b) shall be 
     allocated ratably among such persons on the basis of their 
     respective liabilities or in such other manner as such 
     persons may agree.
       ``(2) FASB liability in case of certain qualifying 
     events.--
       ``(A) In general.--If there is a qualifying event (other 
     than a qualified acquisition) with respect to a qualified 
     steel company, then, subject to the provisions of 
     subparagraphs (C) and (D), the qualified steel company shall 
     be liable for payment to the Trust Fund of the amount 
     determined under subparagraph (B). If a qualified acquisition 
     occurs after another qualifying event, such other qualifying 
     event shall be disregarded for purposes of this paragraph.
       ``(B) Amount of liability.--The amount determined under 
     this subparagraph shall be equal to the excess (if any) of--
       ``(i) the amount determined under the Financial Accounting 
     Standards Board Rule 106 as being equal to the present value 
     of the steel retiree benefits of eligible retirees and 
     beneficiaries of the qualified steel company the liability 
     for which (determined without

[[Page 4897]]

     regard to any modification pursuant to section 1114 of title 
     11, United States Code) is relieved under subsection (a), 
     over
       ``(ii) the sum of--

       ``(I) the value of the assets transferred under subsection 
     (b) with respect to the retirees and beneficiaries, and
       ``(II) the present value of any payments (other than 
     payments determined under this subparagraph) to be made under 
     this subsection with respect to steelmaking assets of the 
     qualified steel company.

       ``(C) Discharges in bankruptcy.--The amount of any 
     liability under subparagraph (B) shall be reduced by the 
     portion of such liability which, in accordance with the 
     provisions of title 11, United States Code, is discharged in 
     any bankruptcy proceeding.
       ``(D) No liability if industry-wide election made.--If a 
     qualifying event occurs by reason of a qualified election 
     under section 912(d)(2)(B), then--
       ``(i) any liability that arose under this paragraph for any 
     qualifying event occurring before such election is 
     extinguished (and any payment of such liability shall be 
     refunded from the Trust Fund with interest), and
       ``(ii) no liability shall arise under this paragraph with 
     respect to the qualifying event occurring by reason of such 
     election or any subsequent qualifying event.
       ``(3) Joint and several liability.--Any related person of 
     any person liable for any payment under this subsection shall 
     be jointly and severally liable for the payment.
       ``(4) Time and manner of payment.--The Secretary shall 
     establish the time and manner of any payment required to be 
     made under this subsection, including the payment of 
     interest.

     ``SEC. 912. QUALIFYING EVENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of this title, the term 
     `qualifying event' means any--
       ``(1) qualified acquisition,
       ``(2) qualified closing,
       ``(3) qualified election, and
       ``(4) qualified bankruptcy transfer.
       ``(b) Qualified Acquisition.--For purposes of this title, 
     the term `qualified acquisition' means any arms'-length 
     transaction or series of related transactions--
       ``(1) under which a person (whether or not a qualified 
     steel company) acquires by purchase, merger, stock 
     acquisition, or otherwise all or substantially all of the 
     steelmaking assets held by the qualified steel company as of 
     January 1, 2000, and
       ``(2) which occur on and after January 1, 2000, and before 
     the date which is 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
     this title.

     Such term shall not include any acquisition by a related 
     person.
       ``(c) Qualified Closing.--For purposes of this title--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified closing' means--
       ``(A) the permanent cessation on or after January 1, 2000, 
     and before January 1, 2004, by a qualified steel company 
     operating under the protection of chapter 11 or 7 of title 
     11, United States Code, of all activities described in 
     subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) of section 901(b), 
     or
       ``(B) the transfer on or after January 1, 2000, and before 
     January 1, 2004, by a qualified steel company operating under 
     the protection of chapter 11 or 7 of title 11, United States 
     Code, of all or substantially all of its steelmaking assets 
     to 1 or more persons other than related persons in an arms'-
     length transaction or series of related transactions which do 
     not constitute a qualified acquisition.
       ``(2) Companies in imminent danger of closure.--A qualified 
     closing of a qualified steel company operating under the 
     protection of chapter 11 or 7 of title 11, United States 
     Code, shall be treated as having occurred if the company--
       ``(A) meets the acquisition effort requirements of 
     paragraph (3),
       ``(B) establishes to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that--
       ``(i) it is in imminent danger of becoming a closed 
     company, or
       ``(ii) in the case of a company operating under protection 
     of chapter 11 of title 11, United States Code, it is unable 
     to reorganize without the relief provided under this title, 
     and
       ``(C) elects, in such manner as the Secretary prescribes, 
     at any time after the date of the enactment of this title and 
     before the date which is 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this title, to avail itself of the relief 
     provided under this title.
       ``(3) Acquisition effort requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--The requirements of this paragraph are 
     met by a qualified steel company if--
       ``(i) the company files with the Secretary within 10 days 
     of the date of the enactment of this title--

       ``(I) a notice of intent to be acquired, and
       ``(II) a description of the actions the company will 
     undertake to have its steelmaking assets acquired in a 
     qualified acquisition, and

       ``(ii) the company at all times after the filing under 
     clause (i) and the date which is 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this title (or, if earlier, the date on 
     which the requirement of paragraph (2)(B) is satisfied) makes 
     a continuing, good faith effort to have its steelmaking 
     assets acquired in a qualified acquisition.
       ``(B) Good faith effort.--A continuing, good faith effort 
     under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall include--
       ``(i) the active marketing of a company's steelmaking 
     assets through the retention of an investment banker, the 
     preparation and distribution of offering materials to 
     prospective purchasers, allowing due diligence and 
     investigatory activities by prospective purchasers, the 
     active and good faith consideration of all expressions of 
     interest by prospective purchasers, and any other affirmative 
     action designed to result in a qualified acquisition of a 
     company's steelmaking assets, and
       ``(ii) a demonstration to the Secretary by the company that 
     no bona fide and fair offer which would have resulted in a 
     qualified acquisition of the company's steelmaking assets has 
     been unreasonably refused.
       ``(d) Qualified Election.--For purposes of this title--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified election' means an 
     election by a qualified steel company operating under the 
     protection of chapter 11 or 7 of title 11, United States 
     Code, meeting the acquisition effort requirements of 
     subsection (c)(3) to transfer its obligations for steel 
     retiree benefits to the retiree benefit program. Such an 
     election shall be made not earlier than the date which is 2 
     years after the date of the enactment of this title, and in 
     such manner as the Secretary may prescribe.
       ``(2) Industry-wide election.--Notwithstanding paragraph 
     (1), a qualified election shall be treated as having occurred 
     with respect to a qualified steel company (whether or not 
     operating under the protection of chapter 11 or 7 of title 
     11, United States Code) if--
       ``(A) the Secretary determines that at least 200,000 
     eligible retirees and beneficiaries have been certified under 
     section 913 for participation in the retiree benefits 
     program, and
       ``(B) the qualified steel company elects to avail itself of 
     the relief provided under this title on or after the date of 
     the determination under subparagraph (A).
       ``(e) Qualified Bankruptcy Transfer.--For purposes of this 
     title, the term `qualified bankruptcy transfer' means any 
     transaction or series of transactions--
       ``(1) under which the qualified steel company, operating 
     under the protection of chapter 11 or 7 of title 11, United 
     States Code, transfers by any means (including but not 
     limited to a plan of reorganization) its control over at 
     least 30 percent of the production capacity of its 
     steelmaking assets to 1 or more persons which are not related 
     persons of such company,
       ``(2) which are not part of a qualified acquisition or 
     qualified closing of a qualified steel company, and
       ``(3) which occur on and after January 1, 2000, and before 
     January 1, 2004.
       ``(f) Certification.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall certify a qualifying 
     event with respect to a qualified steel company if the 
     Secretary determines that the requirements of this title are 
     met with respect to such event and that the asset transfer 
     and contribution requirements of section 911 will be met.
       ``(2) Time for decision.--The Secretary shall make any 
     determination under this subsection as soon as possible after 
     a request is filed (and in the case of a request for 
     certification as a qualified acquisition filed at least 60 
     days before the proposed date of the acquisition, before such 
     proposed date).
       ``(3) Eligibility to file request.--A request for 
     certification under this subsection may be made by the 
     qualified steel company or any labor organization acting on 
     behalf of retirees of such company.

     ``SEC. 913. ELIGIBILITY AND CERTIFICATION.

       ``(a) Retirees.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any individual who is a retiree of a 
     qualified steel company with respect to which the Secretary 
     has certified under section 912 that a qualifying event has 
     occurred shall be treated as an eligible retiree for purposes 
     of this title if--
       ``(A) the individual was receiving steel retiree benefits 
     under an employee benefit plan described in section 
     901(a)(2)(A) as of the date of the qualifying event, or
       ``(B) the individual was eligible to receive such benefits 
     on such date but was not receiving such benefits because the 
     plan ceased to provide such benefits.
       ``(2) Certain individuals included.--An individual shall be 
     treated as an eligible retiree under paragraph (1) if the 
     individual--
       ``(A) was an employee of the qualified steel company before 
     a qualified acquisition,
       ``(B) became an employee of the acquiring company as a 
     result of the acquisition, and
       ``(C) voluntarily retires within 3 years of the 
     acquisition.
       ``(b) Beneficiaries.--An individual shall be treated as an 
     eligible beneficiary for purposes of this title if the 
     individual is the spouse, surviving spouse, or dependent of 
     an eligible retiree (or an individual who would have been an 
     eligible retiree but for the individual's death before the 
     date of the qualifying event).
       ``(c) Certification of Eligible Retirees and 
     Beneficiaries.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Board of Trustees of the Trust Fund 
     shall certify an individual as

[[Page 4898]]

     an eligible retiree or eligible beneficiary if the individual 
     meets the requirements of this section.
       ``(2) Eligibility to file request.--A request for 
     certification under this subsection may be filed by any 
     individual seeking to be certified under this subsection, the 
     qualified steel company, an acquiring company, a labor 
     organization acting on behalf of retirees of such company, or 
     a committee appointed under section 1114 of title 11, United 
     States Code.
       ``(d) Records.--A qualified steel company, an acquiring 
     company, and any successor in interest shall on and after the 
     date of the enactment of this title maintain and make 
     available to the Secretary and the Board of Trustees of the 
     Trust Fund, all records, documents, and materials (including 
     computer programs) necessary to make the certifications under 
     this section.

                      ``PART III--PROGRAM BENEFITS

``Sec. 921. Program benefits.

     ``SEC. 921. PROGRAM BENEFITS.

       ``(a) General Rule.--Each eligible retiree and eligible 
     beneficiary who is certified for participation in the retiree 
     benefits program shall be entitled--
       ``(1) to receive health care benefits coverage described in 
     subsection (b), and
       ``(2) in the case of an eligible retiree, payment of $5,000 
     death benefits coverage to the beneficiary of the retiree 
     upon the retiree's death.
       ``(b) Health Care Benefits Coverage.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Board of Trustees of the Trust Fund 
     shall establish health care benefits coverage under which 
     eligible retirees and beneficiaries are provided benefits for 
     health care items and services that are substantially the 
     same as the benefits offered as of January 1, 2002, under the 
     Blue Cross/Blue Shield Standard Plan provided under the 
     Federal Employees Health Benefit Program under chapter 89 of 
     title 5, United States Code, to Federal employees and 
     annuitants. In providing the benefits under such program, the 
     secondary payer provisions and the provisions relating to 
     benefits provided when an individual is eligible for benefits 
     under the medicare program under title XVIII of the Social 
     Security Act that are applicable under such Plan shall apply 
     in the same manner as such provisions apply to Federal 
     employees and annuitants under such Plan.
       ``(2) Contracting authority.--The Board of Trustees of the 
     Trust Fund shall have the authority to enter into such 
     contracts as are necessary to carry out the provisions of 
     this subsection, including contracts necessary to ensure 
     adequate geographic coverage and cost control. The Board of 
     Trustees may use the authority under this subsection to 
     establish preferred provider organizations or other 
     alternative delivery systems.
       ``(3) Premiums, deductibles, and cost sharing.--The Board 
     of Trustees of the Trust Fund shall establish premiums, 
     deductibles, and cost sharing for eligible retirees and 
     beneficiaries provided health care benefits coverage under 
     paragraph (1) which are substantially the same as those 
     required under the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Standard Plan 
     described in paragraph (1).

         ``Subtitle C--Steel Industry Legacy Relief Trust Fund

     ``SEC. 931. STEEL INDUSTRY LEGACY RELIEF TRUST FUND.

       ``(a) Creation of Trust Fund.--There is established in the 
     Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
     Steel Industry Legacy Relief Trust Fund, consisting of such 
     amounts as may be appropriated to the Trust Fund as provided 
     in this section.
       ``(b) Transfers to Trust Fund.--
       ``(1) In general.--There are appropriated to the Trust Fund 
     amounts equivalent to--
       ``(A) tariffs on steel mill products received in the 
     Treasury under title II of this Act,
       ``(B) amounts received in the Treasury from asset transfers 
     and contributions under section 911,
       ``(C) amounts credited to the Trust Fund under section 
     9602(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and
       ``(D) the premiums paid by retirees under the program.
       ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Trust Fund each fiscal year an 
     amount equal to the excess (if any) of--
       ``(A) expenditures from the Trust Fund for the fiscal year, 
     over
       ``(B) the assets of the Trust Fund for the fiscal year 
     without regard to this paragraph.
       ``(c) Expenditures.--Amounts in the Trust Fund shall be 
     available only for purposes of making expenditures--
       ``(1) to meet the obligations of the United States with 
     respect to liability for steel retiree benefits transferred 
     to the United States under this title, and
       ``(2) incurred by the Secretary and the Board of Trustees 
     in the administration of this title.
       ``(d) Board of Trustees.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Trust Fund and the retiree benefits 
     program shall be administered by a Board of Trustees, 
     consisting of--
       ``(A) 2 individuals designated by agreement of the 5 
     qualified steel companies which, as of the date of the 
     enactment of this title--
       ``(i) are conducting activities described in subparagraph 
     (A) or (B) of section 901(b)(1), and
       ``(ii) have the largest number of retirees, and
       ``(B) 2 individuals designated by the United Steelworkers 
     of America in consultation with the Independent Steelworkers 
     Union, and
       ``(C) 3 individuals designated by individuals designated 
     under subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       ``(2) Duties.--Except for those duties and responsibilities 
     designated to the Secretary, the Board of Trustees shall have 
     the responsibility to administer the Trust Fund and the 
     retiree benefits program, including--
       ``(A) enrolling eligible retirees and beneficiaries under 
     the program,
       ``(B) procuring the medical services to be provided under 
     the program,
       ``(C) entering into contracts, leases, or other 
     arrangements necessary for the implementation of the program,
       ``(D) implementing cost-containment measures under the 
     program,
       ``(E) collecting revenues and enforcing claims and rights 
     of the program and the Trust Fund,
       ``(F) making disbursements as necessary under the program, 
     and
       ``(G) acquiring and maintaining such records as may be 
     necessary for the administration and implementation of the 
     program.
       ``(3) Report.--The Board of Trustees report to Congress 
     each year on the financial condition and the results of the 
     operations of the Trust Fund during the preceding fiscal year 
     and on its expected condition and operations during the next 
     2 fiscal years. Such report shall be printed as a House 
     document of the session of Congress to which the report is 
     made.
       ``(e) Transfer Investment of Assets.--Sections 9601 and 
     9602(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall apply to 
     the Trust Fund.''

 Mr. SPECTER. Mr President, I have sought recognition at this 
time to comment briefly on legislation that I am pleased to cosponsor 
with my colleague, Senator Rockefeller. That legislation, the ``Steel 
Industry Retiree Benefits Protection Act of 2002,'' would set the 
Nation on a path of assuring the retirement health care benefits of the 
Nation's retired steelworkers and their dependants, and the survival of 
a domestic integrated steel industry. I crafted this bill jointly with 
Senator Rockefeller with extensive consultation by the integrated steel 
industry and representatives of the United Steelworkers of America. I 
am pleased to note that labor and management have joined in a common 
effort to resolve the near-intractable problems that face the industry 
today, and I thank them for that spirit of cooperation and compromise.
  The reasons for this legislation are succinctly stated in the 
findings set forth in the preamble of the bill. The domestic steel 
industry has been forced to compete over the last 30 years in an 
international marketplace in which foreign governments have subsidized 
both domestic production and employee healthcare costs and, 
simultaneously, stimulated the creation and maintenance of excess world 
steelmaking capacity. During the 1980's and 1990's, the steel industry 
adapted, but literally hundreds of thousands of steel workers were 
forced into early retirement as the industry streamlined productions 
methods. Since 1997, the situation has worsened, due to the unfair 
practices of overseas producers and governments and a resultant glut of 
foreign imports, to the point that 32 American steel companies have had 
to resort to bankruptcy protection, causing 45,000 steelworkers to lose 
their jobs and over 100,000 steel industry retirees to lose vital 
medical insurance benefits. Record-low steel prices place remaining 
steel producers, and their workers and retirees, in an increasingly 
untenable position.
  A clear consensus now exists that the only way a domestic integrated 
steel industry can survive is through consolidation. It is true that 
the ranks of U.S. integrated producers have been decimated; one need 
only drive through Pennsylvania to see ample evidence of that. But a 
domestic industry does indeed survive. It will continue to survive only 
if there is further consolidation and the emergence of a relatively few 
domestic companies with the muscle to compete in a global marketplace 
with subsidized foreign behemoths. But there is a significant 
impediment to such consolidation: the so-called ``legacy costs'' of 
domestic producers which

[[Page 4899]]

might otherwise be acquired and consolidated into larger, more 
efficient U.S. operations.
  To summarize, a relatively healthy domestic steel producer might find 
the acquisition, and the continued operation, of a weaker steel 
company's manufacturing operations to be quite attractive but for one 
major problem: such operations typically are owned by companies which 
are weighed down by the health care costs of prior generations of 
retirees, retirees who are relatively young due to the premature 
withdrawal of workers from the rolls due to downsizing in the 1980's 
and 1990's. Potential acquirers of such assets have ``legacy costs'' of 
their own to deal with; they cannot afford to assume those of their 
former competitors, a result that would be unavoidable were they to 
simply purchase and consolidate the assets of former competitors. If we 
want consolidation to happen, and it is unquestionably in the Nation's 
self-interest that it happen; few would dispute that the common defense 
requires a viable domestic steel industry, potential acquirers of these 
assets must gain relief from the ``legacy cost'' obligations that would 
otherwise run with the acquired assets.
  My colleagues might ask: if an acquiring steel company is relieved of 
these obligations, who would take them on? The answer is this: a 
Federally-sponsored trust fund, financed with steel tariff receipts; 
funds previously placed in trust by acquired companies for retiree 
health and life insurance benefits; fees to be paid by acquiring 
companies; and, yes, as necessary to cover shortfalls, appropriations. 
To those who say the public cannot take on these obligations, I offer 
the following logic: when steel producers go under, as they will if we 
do not act, the public may very much face exposure to these obligations 
via the Medicare and Medicaid programs; taking them on before the 
companies go under will at least assure that the defense-critical steel 
industry survives. It is an unpleasant choice we face, but it is one 
which we must face: we may either assume ``legacy cost'' obligations 
now and save a vital industry; or we can wait and watch a vital 
industry die and face up to ``legacy costs'' later.
  I strongly appeal to my colleagues in the Senate to seriously 
consider this Hobson's choice. If they do, I trust they will come to 
the same conclusion that I have: we must save this industry by clearing 
the way for the consolidation that will be necessary to compete in the 
international market of the future. And we must protect those who have 
lost, or may yet lose, their health care benefits due to unfair 
competition from abroad. The steelworkers of America, many from the 
``Greatest Generation'' and from my home, Pennsylvania, built the 
Nation in the 20th Century. They made the United States the world's 
only superpower. We need to assure that their post-retirement years are 
secure.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. 
        Chafee):
  S. 2190. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the 
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to provide employees 
with greater control over assets in their pension accounts by providing 
them with better information about investment of the assets, new 
diversification rights, and new limitations on pension plan blackouts, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I rise today with a great deal of 
pride to introduce the Senate's first bipartisan pension reform bill 
since Enron's downfall ruined the lives of thousands of workers and 
their families. I am introducing this bill with Senator Olympia Snowe 
of Maine, who has worked closely with me to develop a much-needed 
proposal that will greatly help our nation's workers to achieve greater 
pension security and receive better investment information and advice. 
Our bill is called the ``Worker Investment and Retirement Education Act 
of 2002,'' or the WIRE Act. Senator Snowe and I are pleased that 
Senator Feinstein and Chafee have joined with us as original 
cosponsors.
  As you know, Enron's bankruptcy, which caused thousands to lose their 
retirement savings, since their pensions were invested heavily in Enron 
stock, has prompted many members of Congress in both parties to 
introduce pension-related legislation. President Bush has also 
suggested several reforms. Many of these proposals share some common 
elements, while others contain measures that are objectionable to one 
side or the other. Senator Snowe and I share the view that worker 
retirement protection is much too important to become another partisan 
issue, where the upcoming elections cloud our judgment and prevent us 
from passing much-needed legislation. We can, and should, pass critical 
pension reform this year that helps American workers fee secure about 
their retirement savings. In my view, the playing field has been tilted 
against workers for far too long, and it is unfortunate that it takes a 
travesty like Enron to make those of us in Congress act in their 
interests.
  Of course, the pension issue is one that falls in the jurisdiction of 
two Senate committees. I strongly support Senator Kennedy's bill, which 
recently passed out of the HELP committee here in the Senate. Soon, 
however, the Senate Finance Committee will also consider pension 
reform. Given that the history of that Committee is one in which the 
best bills are often bipartisan, I wanted to work with Senator Snowe to 
develop a pro-worker bill for the Finance Committee that can be 
combined with Senator Kennedy's bill later on.
  The House of Representatives has also followed such a two-committee 
approach, although I have some significant reservations that the final 
bill that passed last week does not do enough for workers. I hope to 
work within the Finance Committee and with Senator Kennedy to develop a 
better bill here in the Senate, so we can pass legislation this year 
that the President will sign. Our goal should be to pass a bill that 
receives a two-thirds vote in both chambers not because we think 
President Bush will veto it, but because we want to signal to the 
country that partisan politics can be pushed aside when the true 
interests of hard-working Americans are at stake.
  Despite all of the news in recent months about corporate greed and 
excess, recent polls show that nearly two-thirds of the public believes 
that the most important issue with Enron's collapse is the loss of jobs 
and savings. With 38 million people controlling nearly $1.7 trillion in 
401(k) plan assets, and with nearly 40 percent of large-plan assets 
tied up in company stock, much of which cannot be sold until workers 
reach a certain age, it is clear that the playing field needs to be 
tilted back towards workers. Our bill does just that, and because it is 
a complete approach, including all types of so-called ``defined 
contribution'' plans, as opposed to just some plans, it does so without 
opening any major new loopholes that would allow workers to be further 
exploited.
  The first thing workers need out of a pension reform bill is better 
information, because for millions of Americans, their retirement 
savings is their only true asset other than their homes. Under our 
bill, all covered workers would be given basic, unbiased information on 
the basics of investing, as well as personalized information from their 
employers to help them know if they are adequately preparing for their 
retirement years. This additional information will make a huge 
difference to millions of workers who currently have no knowledge about 
the basics of investing, or if they are saving enough to live 
comfortably in retirement.
  Next, since current law prevents most workers from receiving any 
sound guidance about financial planning, our bill includes the text of 
S. 1677, the Bingaman-Collins investment advice bill. Under this bill, 
millions more workers will benefit from professional, independent 
investment advice paid for by their employers. Workers will be able to 
select appropriate investments and better plan for their retirements 
without the creation of new conflicts of interest.
  Like other bills, our bill addresses the issue of blackout periods, 
those

[[Page 4900]]

times when plan participants are prevented from making changes to their 
asset allocations. Senator Snowe and I believe that companies should 
provide adequate notice before any blackout period, our bill requires 
30 days' notice, and inform workers of its expected length. In 
addition, blackouts should generally be limited to 30 days for plans 
that are heavily invested in company stock. Exemptions could be granted 
to small businesses or companies in unusual circumstances, such as a 
merger. This latter rule is one that distinguishes our bill from many 
of the others. But it seems common-sense to use that plans with more 
volatile assets, such as plans heavily invested in company stock, 
should be forced to end blackout periods as quickly as possible in 
order to minimize market risk for the workers.
  Moreover, during blackout periods, management should be prohibited 
from selling large blocks of stock on the open market. We command 
President Bush for suggesting this additional protection for rank-and-
file employees, and we will work with him to help it become law.
  But most important, workers want and deserve a greater say in where 
their money is invested. Diversification is a key principle in any 
balanced investment strategy. Workers should be empowered with the 
ability to direct where their retirement savings are invested.
  While the shift to more broad-based stock ownership is generally a 
positive trend in our society, employees should no longer be forced to 
buy company stock with their own contributions. In addition, if workers 
choose to buy company stock with their own funds, they should be able 
to diversify these contributions whenever they wish. It's their money, 
after all, and they should never be forced to relinquish control of it.
  For employer contributions to retirement plans, workers should be 
allowed to begin diversifying these contributions once they are vested 
in the plan. Our bill accomplishes that goal while avoiding new 
loopholes by applying different diversification rules based on the type 
of contribution, worker payroll deduction, employer matching 
contribution, or employer nonmatching contribution, rather than the 
type of plan. We want to make sure that the situation with Enron never 
happens again, and the protections in our bill will accomplish that 
goal.
  In our view, Congress should also provide special diversification 
rights for older workers, because the closer you are to retirement, the 
more you have to lose should stock prices fall. Therefore, under our 
bill, once a worker turns 55, he or she would be permitted to 
completely diversify their retirement assets, with no restrictions. 
This will be the case regardless of tenure with the firm, and 
regardless of the type of plan. Companies must notify workers of this 
right to diversify when the worker has reached 55 years of age, thereby 
giving older workers the additional layer of protection they deserve 
after a lifetime of work and saving.
  I want to say a word about ESOPs. Employee stock ownership plans are 
important in that they give rank-and-file employees an ownership stake 
in their firms, which is largely a good thing. We should continue to 
encourage firms, both public and private, to include their workers in 
their success. Many public companies are converting parts of their 
401(k)s to ESOPs to take advantage of a feature in the tax code that 
allows them to deduct dividends paid on the shares in the plan. 
However, these conversions to so-called KSOPs have downsides, in that 
these plans are generally more restrictive than 401(k)s when employee 
diversification right are concerned.
  As a result, Congress must include both KSOPs and ESOPs in any new 
diversification rules, to the extent that the plans are at public 
companies. If we fail to include them, or include one but not the 
other, we would open a new loophole while limiting workers rights. But 
again, since broader employee ownership is a generally positive 
development, we need to help workers without killing publicly-traded 
ESOPs. Our bill does so. Plus, another unique feature of the Kerry-
Snowe bill is that for all workers under age 55 who choose to diversify 
some of their KSOP or ESOP shares, the firm will still be allowed to 
deduct for tax purposes the dividends that would have been paid on 
those shares, for the year of the sale and the following two years. 
This provision will smooth the transition to a more worker-friendly 
system.
  Finally, the government should create an Office of Pension 
Participant Advocacy, similar to the Taxpayer Advocate Service, where 
both unionized and non-unionized workers can turn to voice their 
concerns about pension policy. The Pension Participant Advocate would 
issue an annual report to Congress recommending changes to the pension 
laws. This idea is one that appears in several bills before Congress, 
and it is long overdue.
  All of these proposals will protect our workers, and more 
importantly, they will do so without prompting reductions in benefits. 
Businesses could still contribute stock to retirement plans. Workers 
will be empowered to diversify their assets, but they would not face 
any new rules that limit their own choices, such as a hard cap on the 
amount of a single stock they could own. Our bipartisan approach will 
ensure that workers are better off in the long run, and that's the 
outcome we all want.
 Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Kerry 
in introducing the Worker Investment and Retirement Education, or WIRE, 
Act of 2002. The WIRE Act seeks to empower workers by giving them 
control over all of the assets in their retirement accounts and ensures 
that, in addition to having the ability to take command of assets, they 
have the information they need to make sound and informed choices.
  While the need for pension reform was highlighted by the recent 
collapse and bankruptcy of Enron, a review of pension regulations is 
critical for all of the approximate 48 million workers nationwide who 
participate in a defined contribution retirement plan.
  And, as Congress sets out to review existing pension laws, we must 
recognize that there has been a significant shift in Americans' 
retirement savings vehicles over the past several years. In fact, use 
of what we think of as the typical ``pension'', or defined benefit 
plan, has fallen from one-third of all plans to one-tenth in 20 years. 
And, the actual number of defined benefit plans has fallen each year 
since 1986. Although they still account for almost 45 percent of all 
employer-sponsored retirement plan participants, that figure was much 
higher, at 74 percent, just 20 years ago.
  This shift away from defined benefit plans has resulted in the 
explosion of participation in defined contribution plans, giving 
individuals the opportunity to make investment decisions according to 
their own needs and plans for the future. However, with this ability 
comes added responsibility and, depending on the investment choice, 
greater risk. And it is this risk that was so clearly personified by 
the experience of Enron employees.
  On Enron's 40,000 employees, almost 21,000 were participating in the 
Enron Savings Plan, the 401(k) plan. These loyal employees heavily 
invested in Enron, only to be hit by the one-two punch of losing their 
jobs and losing their life savings, with the retirement savings losses 
amounting to over $1 billion. It is their experience that has led us to 
write the legislation we are introducing today.
  While it is critical that the Congress ensure that such a massive 
loss of retirement savings never reoccurs, it is also vital that we 
consider reforms that empower employees, and do not discourage 
employers from contributing to their employees' retirement plans. As we 
set out to draft the WIRE Act we sought first and foremost to do no 
harm to the private pension system.
  The WIRE Act, in seeking to increase employees' access to information 
and ensure that employees have the knowledge necessary to make sound 
investment decisions, requires that individual workers receive annual 
statements regarding the assets in their accounts. In addition, our 
legislation directs the Departments of Labor and the

[[Page 4901]]

Treasury to produce annually a document for all employees giving them 
basic guidelines for retirement investing. This assures that employees 
receive fundamental investment information from an independent 
authority.
  Additionally, the WIRE Act incorporates the language of the 
Independent Investment Advice Act of 2001, clarifying the fiduciary 
rules for plan sponsors who offer access to investment advice by 
providing companies with a safe harbor from liability if they provide 
qualified, independent investment advice for their workers.
  Just as it is critical that we provide access to the information 
necessary to make informed decisions, it is essential that we increase 
employees' diversification rights without inhibiting an employee's 
ability to invest in their company.
  And, certainly a review of the investment decisions of employees 
across the country tells us that the decision of Enron employees to 
invest their retirements heavily in Enron stock is not unique. In fact, 
the employees of many of America's leading companies, our top brand 
names, have chosen similarly to invest more than half of their 
retirement plan assets in company stock, Procter and Gamble, 94.7 
percent, Sherwin-Williams, 91.6 percent, Pfizer, 88.5 percent, 
McDonald's, 74.3 percent, the list goes on and on.
  And so where does that leave us? How does Congress balance an 
individual's right to make their own investment decisions, with trying 
to make sure that no other class of employees suffer as significant a 
loss as that experienced by Enron employees?
  The WIRE Act proposes that the answer to these questions lies in the 
ability of employees to access and diversify company stock. Therefore, 
we create specialized diversification rights that are dependent upon 
the manner in which the stock was added to the employee's account.
  For instance, for voluntary purchases of company stock by employees, 
workers should be able to diversify those shares at any time, after 
all, it is their own money. For employer-matching contributions made in 
the form of company stock, half of those shares can be diversified 
after three years of service, and one hundred percent can be 
diversified after five years of service.
  Importantly, as our intent is to first do no harm to the current 
employer-sponsored pension system, the WIRE Act attempts to mitigate 
any potential loss of tax incentives enjoyed by employers for making 
contributions in the form of company stock when that stock is 
diversified. We do this by allowing employers to continue to deduct the 
dividends that would have been paid on employee held company stock for 
the remainder of that calendar year and for two additional years. This 
provision, which is unique to the WIRE Act, would ensure that the 
diversification rights given to employees does not have the unfortunate 
effect of reducing employer contributions to pension plans--which would 
be harmful to both the employees and the employers.
  The bill we introduce today aims to do nothing to limit personal 
choice, which is the cornerstone of American beliefs, but instead 
empower investors with the knowledge and ability to make some of the 
most fundamental financial decisions a person can make. However, as we 
begin to consider how best to empower and educate employees, it is just 
as essential that we do not create any disincentives for employers to 
stop participating in their employees' retirement security. Employers 
play a critical role in the retirement planning of their employees and 
it is critical that we encourage this role to continue.
  Retirement is part of the American dream, and to that end we must do 
whatever we can to ensure that this dream is achievable for everyone. I 
look forward to working with the other members of the Finance 
Committee, and the Senate, to consider addressing the need for pension 
reform.

                          ____________________