[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1732-1745]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. 
        Hatch):
  S. 205. A bill to authorize the issuance of immigrant visas to, and 
the admission to the United States for permanent residence of, certain 
scientists, engineers, and technicians who have worked in Iraqi weapons 
of mass destruction programs; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, on October 7, 2002, the President of the 
United States said something very important about United Nations 
inspections in Iraq. He said: ``Clearly, to actually work, any new 
inspections . . . will have to be very different. . . . To ensure that 
we learn the truth, the regime must allow witnesses to its illegal 
activities to be interviewed outside the country--and these witnesses 
must be free to bring their families with them so they are all beyond 
the reach of Saddam Hussein's terror and murder. And inspectors must 
have access to any site, at any time, without pre-clearance, without 
delay, without exceptions.''
  The President was right on the money about inspections. This is how 
to get the information the world needs on Saddam Hussein's weapons of 
mass destruction. Inspections are vital to stripping him of those 
banned weapons.
  The United Nations responded properly to the President's challenge. 
On November 8, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1441, which 
provided: . . . that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate, 
unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all, 
including underground areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, 
and means of transport which they wish to inspect, as well as 
immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted, and private access to all officials 
and other persons whom UNMOVIC or the IAEA wish to interview in the 
mode or location of UNMOVIC's or the IAEA's choice pursuant to any 
aspect of their mandates; further decides that UNMOVIC and the IAEA may 
at their discretion conduct interviews inside or outside of Iraq, may 
facilitate the travel of those interviewed and family members outside 
of Iraq, and that, at the sole discretion of UNMOVIC and the IAEA, such 
interviews may occur without the presence of observers from the Iraqi 
government.''
  The inspectors are given unprecedented authority. But how are they to 
implement it? Where will those weapons scientists and their families 
go, once they've told the truth about Saddam's weapons programs? They 
can't go home again. And at least in the short run, there will be no 
safe haven in the region for people who reveal Saddam's most terrible 
secrets.
  Maybe some can go to Europe, although both al Qaeda cells and 
Saddam's agents have operated there. Maybe some can go to Canada, or to 
South America.
  If the United States wants the world to show resolve in dealing with 
Saddam Hussein, however, then we must take the lead in admitting those 
people who have the courage to betray Saddam's nuclear, chemical, 
biological or missile programs. We have a large country in which to 
absorb those people, and, for all our problems, we have the best law 
enforcement and security apparatus to guard them.
  What we do not have is an immigration system that readily admits 
large numbers of persons who were involved with weapons of mass 
destruction, have aided a country in the sop-called ``axis of evil,'' 
and are bringing their families. I introduced legislation last October, 
therefore, to admit to our country those personnel, and their families, 
who give critical and reliable information on Saddam's programs to us, 
to the United Nations, or to the International Atomic Energy Agency. On 
November 20, the Senate passed an amended version of that bill, S. 
3079, with the strong support of the Administration; but there was not 
enough time for the House of Representatives to act on the legislation.
  Two months have passed since inspections were resumed in Iraq. The 
new inspectors are gaining experience, as well as actionable 
intelligence from the United States and other countries. They are 
beginning to find unreported weapons; and every weapon destroyed is a 
weapon that will never be used to cause mass destruction or to attack 
U.S. forces.
  But inspectors have had a hard time getting truthful information from 
the Iraqis they interview. Saddam Hussein terrorizes his people, 
including his weapons scientists, so effectively that they are afraid 
to be interviewed in private, let alone outside the country. They know 
that even the appearance of cooperation could be a death sentence for 
themselves or their families.
  To overcome this obstacle, and to discover and dismantle Saddam 
Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, UNMOVIC and the IAEA must 
interview relevant persons securely and with their families protected, 
even if they protest publicly against this treatment. Hans Blix may 
dislike running ``a defection agency,'' but that could be the only way 
to obtain truthful information about Saddam's weapons of mass 
destruction. The protests of those interviewed can actually be helpful, 
as they prevent Saddam from knowing which of his personnel may be 
willing to tell the truth once they and their families are given a 
secure environment.
  The United States must help UNMOVIC and the IAEA to create that 
secure environment. So, today I am re-introducing the Iraqi Scientists 
Immigration Act.
  I am joined by my esteemed colleague on the Judiciary Committee,

[[Page 1733]]

Senator Specter of Pennsylvania, who co-sponsored the original bill, 
and also by the chairmen of the Foreign Relations Committee and the 
Judiciary Committee Senator Lugar of Indiana and Senator Hatch of Utah. 
I have been assured, moreover, that the Administration remains eager to 
see this bill enacted. This bill is not political. Rather, it is a 
bipartisan effort to help the President succeed in forcing Iraq to 
destroy all its weapons of mass destruction capabilities.
  I urge my colleagues to support quick action on this legislation. 
Iraqis will not come forward unless we offer protection to them and 
their families. Those who are willing to provide truthful information 
will merit our protection. And their information will help disarm 
Saddam Hussein; it will save lives if we have to go to war; and it 
could even help us to disarm Saddam without a war.
  Current law includes several means of either paroling non-immigrants 
into the United States or admitting people for permanent residence, 
notwithstanding their normal inadmissibility under the law. These are 
very limited provisions, however, and they will not suffice to 
accommodate hundreds of Iraqi scientists and their families.
  The legislation that I am re-introducing, the ``Iraqi Scientists 
Immigration Act of 2003,'' will permit the Attorney General, on a case-
by-case basis in coordination with the Secretary of State and the 
Director of Central Intelligence, to admit a foreigner and his family 
if such person: has worked in an Iraqi program to produce weapons of 
mass destruction or the means to deliver them; is willing to supply or 
has supplied critical and reliable information on that program to an 
agency of the United States Government; may be willing to supply or has 
supplied such information to United Nations or IAEA inspectors; and 
will be or has been placed in danger as a result of providing such 
information.
  The Attorney General will also have the authority to give legal 
permanent resident status to persons who provide the promised 
information.
  Finally, this legislation will be limited to the admission of 500 
scientists, plus their families. If it works and we need to enlarge the 
program, we can do so.
  The important thing to do now is to give our country the initial 
authority, and to give United Nations inspectors the ability to 
reassure Saddam's nuclear, chemical, biological and missile experts 
that they and their families will be protected if they help the world 
to bring those programs down.
  President Bush, other world leaders, and the inspectors in Iraq are 
trying to disarm a tyrant whose arms programs make him a danger to 
world peace. And they are trying to do this without going to war, even 
as we prepare to wage that war if necessary. We owe it to the 
inspectors to give them every chance to succeed. We owe it to the 
President to give him the tools he needs to help those inspectors. We 
owe it to Iraq's people and its neighbors to do everything we can to 
dismantle its weapons of mass destruction programs. And we owe it to 
our own people to do all we can to achieve that end peacefully, and 
with international support.
  This bill is a small, but vital step toward those ends. I urge my 
colleagues to give it their immediate attention and support.
  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. 205

       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 ``Iraqi Scientists Immigration 
     Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. ADMISSION OF CRITICAL ALIENS.

       (a) Nonimmigrant Category.--Section 101(a)(15) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (U);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (V) 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(W) Subject to section 214(s), an alien--
       ``(i) who the Attorney General determines, in coordination 
     with the Secretary of State, the Director of Central 
     Intelligence, and such other officials as he may deem 
     appropriate, and in the Attorney General's unreviewable 
     discretion, is an individual--
       ``(I) who has worked at any time in an Iraqi program to 
     produce weapons of mass destruction or the means to deliver 
     them;
       ``(II) who is in possession of critical and reliable 
     information concerning any such Iraqi program;
       ``(III) who is willing to provide, or has provided, such 
     information to the United States Government;
       ``(IV) who may be willing to provide, or has provided, such 
     information to inspectors of the United Nations or of the 
     International Atomic Energy Agency;
       ``(V) who will be or has been placed in danger as a result 
     of providing such information; and
       ``(VI) whose admission would be in the public interest or 
     in the interest of national security; or
       ``(ii) who is the spouse, married or unmarried son or 
     daughter, parent, or other relative, as determined by the 
     Attorney General in his unreviewable discretion, of an alien 
     described in clause (i), if accompanying or following to join 
     such alien, and whose admission the Attorney General, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of State and the Director of 
     Central Intelligence, determines in his unreviewable 
     discretion is in the public interest or in the interest of 
     national security.''.
       (b) Limitations and Conditions Applicable to ``W'' 
     Nonimmigrants.--Section 214 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 
     105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) 
     of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of 
     Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the 
     Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by 
     section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) 
     as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(s) Numerical Limitations and Conditions of Admission and 
     Stay For Nonimmigrants Admitted Under Section 
     101(a)(15)(W).--
       ``(1) Limitation.--The number of aliens who may be admitted 
     to the United States or otherwise granted status under 
     section 101(a)(15)(W)(i) may not exceed a total of 500.
       ``(2) Conditions.--As a condition for the admission, and 
     continued stay in lawful status, of any alien admitted to the 
     United States or otherwise granted status as a nonimmigrant 
     under section 101(a)(15)(W), the nonimmigrant--
       ``(A) shall report to the Attorney General such information 
     concerning the alien's whereabouts and activities as the 
     Attorney General may require;
       ``(B) may not be convicted of any criminal offense 
     punishable by a term of imprisonment of 1 year or more after 
     the date of such admission or grant of status;
       ``(C) must have executed a form that waives the 
     nonimmigrant's right to contest, other than on the basis of 
     an application for withholding of removal or for protection 
     under the Convention Against Torture, any action for removal 
     of the alien instituted before the alien obtains lawful 
     permanent resident status;
       ``(D) shall cooperate fully with all requests for 
     information from the United States Government including, but 
     not limited to, fully and truthfully disclosing to the United 
     States Government all information in the alien's possession 
     concerning any Iraqi program to produce weapons of mass 
     destruction or the means to deliver them; and
       ``(E) shall abide by any other condition, limitation, or 
     restriction imposed by the Attorney General.''.
       (c) Adjustment of Status.--Section 245 of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``or'' before ``(8)''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period ``or (9) an alien who 
     was admitted as a nonimmigrant described in section 
     101(a)(15)(W)'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (l), relating to ``U'' visa 
     nonimmigrants, as subsection (m); and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(n) Adjustment to Permanent Resident Status of `W' 
     Nonimmigrants.--
       ``(1) In general.--If, in the opinion of the Attorney 
     General, a nonimmigrant admitted into the United States (or 
     otherwise provided nonimmigrant status) under section 
     101(a)(15)(W)(i) has complied with section 214(s) since such 
     admission or grant of status, the Attorney General may, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of State and the Director of 
     Central Intelligence, and in his unreviewable discretion, 
     adjust the status of the alien (and any alien who has 
     accompanied or followed to join such alien pursuant to 
     section 101(a)(15)(W)(ii) and who has complied with section 
     214(s) since admission or grant of nonimmigrant status) to 
     that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if 
     the alien is not described in section 212(a)(3)(E).

[[Page 1734]]

       ``(2) Record of admission; reduction in visa numbers.--Upon 
     the approval of adjustment of status of any alien under 
     paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall record the alien's 
     lawful admission for permanent residence as of the date of 
     such approval and the Secretary of State shall reduce by one 
     the number of visas authorized to be issued under sections 
     201(d) and 203(b)(4) for the fiscal year then current.''.
       (d) Waiver Authority.--Section 212(d) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)) is amended by 
     inserting after paragraph (1) the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Attorney General shall determine whether a ground 
     of inadmissibility exists with respect to a nonimmigrant 
     described in section 101(a)(15)(W). The Attorney General, in 
     the Attorney General's discretion, may waive the application 
     of subsection (a) in the case of such a nonimmigrant if the 
     Attorney General considers it to be in the public interest or 
     in the interest of national security.''.
       (e) Conforming Amendment.--Section 248(1) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1258(1)) is amended 
     by striking ``or (S)'' and inserting ``(S), or (W)''.

     SEC. 3. WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION DEFINED.

       (a) In General.--In this Act, the term ``weapon of mass 
     destruction'' has the meaning given the term in section 
     1403(1) of the Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction 
     Act of 1996 (title XIV of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2717; 
     50 U.S.C. 2302(1)), as amended by subsection (b).
       (b) Technical Correction.--Section 1403(1)(B) of the 
     Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 1996 
     (title XIV of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2717; 50 U.S.C. 
     2302(1)(B)) is amended by striking ``a disease organism'' and 
     inserting ``a biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those 
     terms are defined in section 178 of title 18, United States 
     Code)''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH:
  S. 207. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a 10-year extension of the credit for producing electricity from wind; 
to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
encourage a more environmentally friendly electricity future for the 
United States.
  The bill I am introducing would provide for a ten-year extension of 
the tax credit for producing electricity from wind. I believe that an 
extension of this length will provide stability to this important 
emerging energy sector.
  For the past several years, we have provided short-term extensions, 
sometimes retroactively, of this important tax incentive. The result 
has been that investors and utilities have been hesitant to commit the 
capital necessary to bring wind projects on line.
  A major European wind turbine manufacturer had planned to build its 
first U.S. manufacturing facility in Portland, OR. The plant was 
expected to provide over 1,000 family-wage jobs once operational. 
Unfortunately, last November, the corporation announced it would put 
those plans on hold and lay off more than 500 employees. This happened 
at a time when Oregon already had one of the highest unemployment rates 
in the country.
  The main reason given for putting on hold this facility was the 
failure of the Congress to clarify the production tax credit for wind 
energy. Slow demand in this economic downturn was also cited.
  However, our economy is going to rebound. And when it does, the 
demand for electricity will increase. There is already over 180 
megawatts of installed wind energy capacity, with another 150 megawatts 
of planned development. The Stateline Wind Energy Project, which 
straddles the Oregon-Washington border, has over 263 megawatts of 
installed capacity, making it the largest wind farm to date in the 
western United States.
  When the Senate passed national energy legislation last year, there 
was a strong, bipartisan commitment to renewable energy resources. We 
can use the tax code to encourage the development of clean, renewable 
sources of electricity and a new generation of advanced technology 
vehicles. These vehicles can reduce our reliance on imported oil 
because their fuel efficiency is greatly improved and there are lower 
emissions of greenhouse gases and ozone-forming pollutants.
  I have always held that if we use technology wisely, we can improve 
our environmental stewardship while maintaining our human stewardship 
and the standard of living we enjoy in this great Nation.
  I would urge my colleague to join me in cosponsoring this important 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 208. A bill to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
develop and implement a plan to provide security for cargo entering the 
United States or being transported in intrastate or interstate 
commerce; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation aimed 
at closing the dangerous cargo security loophole in our Nation's 
aviation security network.
  In the wake of September 11 terrorist attacks, with the passage of 
the Aviation and Security Act of 2001, we reinvented aviation security. 
We overturned the status quo, and I am proud of the work we did. We put 
the Federal Government in charge of security and we have made 
significant strides toward restoring the confidence of the American 
people that it is safe to fly.
  We no longer have a system in which the financial ``bottom line'' 
interferes with protecting the flying public. We also addressed the 
gamut of critical issues, including baggage screening, additional air 
marshals, cockpit security, and numerous other issues.
  But there is more work to be done. We must not lose focus. If we are 
to fully confront the aviation security challenges we face in the 
aftermath of September 11, we must remain aggressive. We need a ``must-
do'' attitude, not excuses about what ``can't be done,'' because we are 
only as safe as the weakest link in our aviation security system.
  I believe one of the most troubling shortcomings, which persists to 
this day, is lax air cargo security infrastructure in this country. 
According to the GAO, a full 22 percent of all the cargo shipped by air 
in this country in 2000 was shipped on passenger flights and typically 
half of the hull of every passenger plane is filled with cargo. The 
Department of Transportation Inspector General has recommended that 
current air cargo controls be tightened, particularly the process for 
certifying freight forwarders and assessing their compliance with 
security requirements, and has warned that the existing screening 
system is ``easily circumvented.'' This must not be allowed to stand.
  Moreover, according to a Washington Post report last summer, Internal 
Transportation Security Administration documents warn of an increased 
risk of an attack designed to exploit this vulnerability because TSA 
has been focused primarily on meeting its new mandates to screen 
passengers and luggage.
  This is clear evidence that cargo security needs to be bolstered. And 
time is not on our side. We must act now. The bill I am introducing 
today is designed to tackle this issue by directing the TSA to submit a 
detailed cargo security plan to Congress that will address the 
shortcomings in the current system.
  And while TSA is designing and implementing this plan, my bill would 
require interim security measures to be put in place immediately. The 
interim security plan would include random screening of at least 5 
percent of all cargo, an authentication policy designed to ensure that 
terrorists are not able to impersonate legitimate shippers, audits of 
each phase of the shipping process in order to police compliance, 
training and background checks for cargo handlers, and funding for 
screening and detection equipment.
  On September 11, terrorists exposed the vulnerability of our 
commercial aviation network in the most horrific fashion. The Aviation 
and Transportation Security Act of 2001 was a major step in the right 
direction, but we must always stay one step ahead of those who would 
commit vicious acts of violence on our soil aimed at innocent men, 
women, and children.
  This bill is designed to build on the foundation we set in 2001. I 
urge my colleagues to join me in addressing this critical matter.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Cornyn, Mr.

[[Page 1735]]

        Levin, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Fitzgerald, and Mr. Allen):
  S. 209. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to waive 
the income inclusion on a distribution from an individual retirement 
account to the extent that the distribution is contributed for 
charitable purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation 
today that will enhance and encourage charitable giving in the United 
States. The Charitable IRA Rollover Act will allow individuals to 
rollover assets from an Individual Retirement Account, or ``IRA,'' to a 
charity without incurring income tax consequences.
  One of my priorities has been to promote charitable giving and expand 
the role charities and faith-based institutions play in addressing 
social problems in the United States. I hope this legislation moves us 
further in that direction.
  Government alone cannot solve society's most serious problems. In 
fact, government social programs often fail in their missions. The old 
welfare system is a perfect example of what often goes wrong when 
government tends to throw money at a problem.
  Under the old system, while trying to help people, government 
actually encouraged them to stay on welfare. It encouraged out-of-
wedlock births and discouraged fathers from living at home. Many of 
these unintended consequences were addressed with the welfare reform 
bill, which will be reauthorized this year. The success of these 
reforms are evident in welfare rolls, which have now dropped by half 
across the United States.
  But government is not the solution. Charities change hearts and lives 
and have a superior track record to the government in tackling social 
ills.
  America's top charities address a broad range of problems. From the 
Salvation Army to the Boys and Girls Clubs, and the American Cancer 
Society to the Red Cross, each plays a role in improving America's 
health, education and welfare. Their success has been documented. It 
has been demonstrated that mentors in the Big Brothers/Big Sisters 
program can cut drug abuse by 50 percent.
  Charitable giving is an American tradition. Americans appreciate the 
role of charities and are actively involved in many philanthropic 
causes. Nearly half of all Americans volunteer in some capacity on a 
regular basis, including nearly 25 percent of Americans who are active 
volunteers in religious affiliated organizations. That is why it is 
logical to use faith-based organizations as a means of accomplishing 
objectives which can be more personal and tailored to the individual in 
need.
  The legislation I am introducing today helps these organizations by 
making it easier for people to make charitable contributions. 
Individuals age 59\1/2\ and older will be able to move assets without 
penalty from an IRA directly to a charity or into a qualifying deferred 
charitable gift plan, such as a charitable remainder trust, pooled 
income fund or gift annuity. Current law requires taxpayers to first 
withdraw the IRA proceeds and pay taxes on them before contributing the 
remaining funds to a charity. While current law allows taxes on the 
withdrawal to be offset somewhat by the current charitable deduction, 
this ability is limited.
  Americans currently hold more than $2 trillion in assets in IRAs, and 
nearly 40 percent of American households have IRAs. This bill would 
allow senior citizens who have provided well for their retirement to 
transfer IRA funds to charities without the government taking a slice. 
This will cut bureaucratic obstacles and disincentives to charitable 
giving and unlock a substantial amount of new funds that could flow to 
America's charitable organizations.
  The time for promoting charitable giving has come.
  This proposal benefits everyone involved. Individuals will be able to 
give more of their savings to charities of importance to them. 
Charities will benefit from increased philanthropy, enabling them to 
continue their important work. Those needing help will have increased 
access to services from these charities. And the government will have 
to take care of fewer of those in need as charities are better able to 
assume that burden.
  This is not a partisan proposal. It is a common sense way to remove 
obstacles to charitable giving. Senators Durbin and Levin are original 
co-sponsors of this legislation. I look forward to working with them, 
the White House and many other colleagues to pass this bill. I hope the 
Senate will join in this effort to provide a valuable source of 
philanthropy for our nation's charities.
  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:

       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 ``Charitable IRA Rollover Act 
     of 2003.''.

     SEC. 2. TAX-FREE DISTRIBUTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT 
                   ACCOUNTS FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (d) of section 408 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to individual 
     retirement accounts) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(8) Distributions for charitable purposes.--
       ``(A) In general.--No amount shall be includible in gross 
     income by reason of a qualified charitable distribution from 
     an individual retirement account to an organization described 
     in section 170(c).
       ``(B) Special rules relating to charitable remainder 
     trusts, pooled income funds, and charitable gift annuities.--
       ``(i) In general.--No amount shall be includible in gross 
     income by reason of a qualified charitable distribution from 
     an individual retirement account--

       ``(I) to a charitable remainder annuity trust or a 
     charitable remainder unitrust (as such terms are defined in 
     section 664(d)),
       ``(II) to a pooled income fund (as defined in section 
     642(c)(5)), or
       ``(III) for the issuance of a charitable gift annuity (as 
     defined in section 501(m)(5)).

     The preceding sentence shall apply only if no person holds an 
     income interest in the amounts in the trust, fund, or annuity 
     attributable to such distribution other than one or more of 
     the following: the individual for whose benefit such account 
     is maintained, the spouse of such individual, or any 
     organization described in section 170(c).
       ``(ii) Determination of inclusion of amounts distributed.--
     In determining the amount includible in the gross income of 
     any person by reason of a payment or distribution from a 
     trust referred to in clause (i)(I) or a charitable gift 
     annuity (as so defined), the portion of any qualified 
     charitable distribution to such trust or for such annuity 
     which would (but for this subparagraph) have been includible 
     in gross income--

       ``(I) shall be treated as income described in section 
     664(b)(1), and
       ``(II) shall not be treated as an investment in the 
     contract.

       ``(iii) No inclusion for distribution to pooled income 
     fund.--No amount shall be includible in the gross income of a 
     pooled income fund (as so defined) by reason of a qualified 
     charitable distribution to such fund.
       ``(C) Qualified charitable distribution.--For purposes of 
     this paragraph, the term `qualified charitable distribution' 
     means any distribution from an individual retirement 
     account--
       ``(i) which is made on or after the date that the 
     individual for whose benefit the account is maintained has 
     attained age 59\1/2\, and
       ``(ii) which is made directly from the account to--

       ``(I) an organization described in section 170(c), or
       ``(II) a trust, fund, or annuity referred to in 
     subparagraph (B).

       ``(D) Denial of deduction.--The amount allowable as a 
     deduction under section 170 to the taxpayer for the taxable 
     year shall be reduced (but not below zero) by the sum of the 
     amounts of the qualified charitable distributions during such 
     year which would be includible in the gross income of the 
     taxpayer for such year but for this paragraph.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce, along with 
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, the charitable IRA Rollover Act of 2003. 
We have introduced this legislation in the last two Congresses. Senator 
Hutchison and I sincerely hope that this legislation will finally 
become law this year.
  The IRA Charitable Rollover Act has the support of numerous 
charitable organizations across the United States. The effect of this 
bill would be to

[[Page 1736]]

unlock billions of dollars in savings Americans hold and make them 
available to charities. Our legislation will allow individuals to roll 
assets from an Individual Retirement Account into a charity or a 
deferred charitable gift plan without incurring any income tax 
consequences. Thus, the donation would be made to charity without ever 
withdrawing it as income and paying tax on it.
  Americans currently hold about $2 trillion in assets in IRAs. This 
represents over one-fifth of Americans' total retirement market assets 
and will likely grow due to the increased contribution limits enacted 
as part of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 
2001. Recent studies show that assets of qualified retirement plans, 
such as IRAs, comprise a substantial part of peoples' net worth. Many 
of these individuals would like to give a portion of these assets to 
charity, but are reluctant to do so because of the tax consequences.
  Under our current law, if money from an IRA is transferred to a 
charitable organization or into a charitable remainder trust, donors 
are required to recognize that as income. Therefore, absent the changes 
called for in the legislation, the donor will have taxable income in 
the year the gift is funded. This is a huge disincentive contained in 
our complicated and burdensome tax code. This legislation will unleash 
a critical source of funding for our Nation's charities. This 
legislation will provide millions of Americans with a commonsense way 
to remove obstacles to private charitable giving.
  Under the Hutchison-Durbin plan, an individual, upon reaching age 
59\1/2\, could move assets penalty- and tax-free from an IRA directly 
to charity or into a qualifying deferred charitable gift plan--e.g. 
charitable remainder trusts, pooled income funds and gift annuities. In 
the latter case the donor would be able to receive an income stream 
from the retirement plan assets, which would be taxed according to 
normal rules. Upon the death of the individual, the remainder would be 
transferred to charity tax free.
  There are numerous supporters of this legislation including the Art 
Institute of Chicago, the University of Chicago, the Field Museum, the 
Catholic Diocese of Peoria, Northwestern University, the Chicago 
Symphony Orchestra, Georgetown University, and others. There are over 
100 groups in Illinois alone that support this sensible legislation.
  I hope the Senate will join in this bipartisan effort to provide a 
valuable new source of philanthropy for our Nation's charities. I hope 
that our colleagues will cosponsor this important piece of legislation 
and that it will be enacted into law this year. I thank the Senator 
from Texas, Senator Hutchison, for working with me and my staff in this 
effort.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN.
  S. 210. A bill to provide for the protection of archaeological sites 
in the Galisteo Basin in New Mexico, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased today to again introduce 
legislation to protect several important archaeological sites in the 
Galisteo Basin in New Mexico. This bill identifies approximately two 
dozen sites in northern New Mexico which contain the ruins of pueblos 
dating back almost 900 years. When Coronado and other Spanish 
conquistadors first entered what is now New Mexico in 1541, they 
encountered a thriving Pueblo culture with its own unique tradition of 
religion, architecture and art, which was influenced through an 
extensive trade system. We know that these sites remain occupied up 
through the Pueblo revolt in 1680. After that, the sites were deserted, 
although we still don't know why they were abandoned, after over 700 
years of continuous use.
  Through these sites, we have the opportunity to learn more not only 
about the history and culture of these Pueblos, but also about the 
first interaction between European and Native American cultures. The 
Cochiti Pueblo, in particular, is culturally and historically tied to 
these sites, which have tremendous historical and religious 
significance to the Pueblo. I am grateful for the continued support of 
the Pueblo de Cochiti for this legislation. This bill has strong local 
support, including the Santa Fe Board of County Commissioners, the City 
of Santa Fe, and the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. I would also like to 
thank the Archaeological Conservancy for its efforts over the past 
several years to identify and protect many of these sites, and in 
helping with this legislation.
  Many of these archaeological sites are on Federal land administered 
by the Bureau of Land Management. BLM archaeologists have already 
provided extensive background research on many of these sites, and I 
was pleased that the agency supported a similar bill I introduced in 
the previous Congress. Last Congress the Energy and Natural Resources 
Committee held a hearing on this bill in Santa Fe. It was clear from 
that hearing that there is strong local support for protecting these 
sites. In fact nobody testified in opposition to the bill, at either 
the Santa Fe or Washington hearings.
  This bill simply authorizes the BLM to work in a cooperative manner 
with interested landowners to protect sites on Federal and non-Federal 
lands. Last Congress we included several provisions to make clear that 
the bill did not infringe on private property rights.
  Although the bill is non-controversial, we have been unable to get 
the legislation passed through both the House and Senate, although last 
Congress I was pleased that bill was favorably reported by the Energy 
and Natural Resources Committee and passed by the Senate as part of a 
larger public lands bill. In the years since I first introduced this 
bill, many irreplaceable archaeological resources have been lost, 
whether by vandalism, erosion, or other means. Enactment of the 
Galisteo Basin Archaeological Sites Protection Act will allow us to 
take the steps necessary to protect these resources and to allow for 
improved public understanding and interpretation of these sites.
  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. 210

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Galisteo Basin 
     Archaeological Sites Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the Galisteo Basin and surrounding area of New Mexico 
     is the location of many well preserved prehistoric and 
     historic archaeological resources of Native American and 
     Spanish colonial cultures;
       (2) these resources include the largest ruins of Pueblo 
     Indian settlements in the United States, spectacular examples 
     of Native American rock art, and ruins of Spanish colonial 
     settlements; and
       (3) these resources are being threatened by natural causes, 
     urban development, vandalism, and uncontrolled excavations.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to provide for the 
     preservation, protection, and interpretation of the 
     nationally significant archaeological resources in the 
     Galisteo Basin in New Mexico.

     SEC. 3. GALISTEO BASIN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROTECTION SITES.

       (a) In General.--The following archaeological sites located 
     in the Galisteo Basin in the State of New Mexico, totaling 
     approximately 4,591 acres, are hereby designated as Galisteo 
     Basin Archaeological Protection Sites:

        Name                                                      Acres
Arroyo Hondo Pueblo..................................................21
Burnt Corn Pueblo...................................................110
Chamisa Locita Pueblo................................................16
Comanche Gap Petroglyphs............................................764
Espinoso Ridge Site.................................................160
La Cienega Pueblo & Petroglyphs.....................................126
La Cienega Pithouse Village.........................................179
La Cieneguilla Petroglyphs/Camino Real Site.........................531
La Cieneguilla Pueblo................................................11
Lamy Pueblo..........................................................30
Lamy Junction Site...................................................80
Las Huertas..........................................................44
Pa'ako Pueblo........................................................29
Petroglyph Hill.....................................................130
Pueblo Blanco.......................................................878
Pueblo Colorado.....................................................120
Pueblo Galisteo/Las Madres..........................................133
Pueblo Largo.........................................................60
Pueblo She..........................................................120
Rote Chert Quarry.....................................................5
San Cristobal Pueblo................................................520
San Lazaro Pueblo...................................................360

[[Page 1737]]

San Marcos Pueblo...................................................152
Upper Arroyo Hondo Pueblo............................................12
                                                               ________
                                                               
    Total Acreage.................................................4,591

       (b) Availability of Maps.--The archaeological protection 
     sites listed in subsection (a) are generally depicted on a 
     series of 19 maps entitled ``Galisteo Basin Archaeological 
     Protection Sites'' and dated July, 2002. The Secretary of the 
     Interior (hereinafter referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall 
     keep the maps on file and available for public inspection in 
     appropriate offices in New Mexico of the Bureau of Land 
     Management and the National Park Service.
       (c) Boundary Adjustments.--The Secretary may make minor 
     boundary adjustments to the archaeological protection sites 
     by publishing notice thereof in the Federal Register.

     SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL SITES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) continue to search for additional Native American and 
     Spanish colonial sites in the Galisteo Basin area of New 
     Mexico; and
       (2) submit to Congress, within three years after the date 
     funds become available and thereafter as needed, 
     recommendations for additions to, deletions from, and 
     modifications of the boundaries of the list of archaeological 
     protection sites in section 3 of this Act.
       (b) Additions Only by Statute.--Additions to or deletions 
     from the list in section 3 shall be made only by an Act of 
     Congress.

     SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) The Secretary shall administer archaeological 
     protection sites located on Federal land in accordance with 
     the provisions of this Act, the Archaeological Resources 
     Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. 470aa et seq.), the Native 
     American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 
     3001 et seq.), and other applicable laws in a manner that 
     will protect, preserve, and maintain the archaeological 
     resources and provide for research thereon.
       (2) The Secretary shall have no authority to administer 
     archaeological protection sites which are on non-Federal 
     lands except to the extent provided for in a cooperative 
     agreement entered into between the Secretary and the 
     landowner.
       (3) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to extend the 
     authorities of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 
     1979 or the Native American Graves Protection and 
     Repatriation Act to private lands which are designated as an 
     archaeological protection site.
       (b) Management Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Within three complete fiscal years after 
     the date funds are made available, the Secretary shall 
     prepare and transmit to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the United States Senate and the Committee on 
     Natural Resources of the United States House of 
     Representatives, a general management plan for the 
     identification, research, protection, and public 
     interpretation of--
       (A) the archaeological protection sites located on Federal 
     land; and
       (B) for sites on State or private lands for which the 
     Secretary has entered into cooperative agreements pursuant to 
     section 6 of this Act.
       (2) Consultation.--The general management plan shall be 
     developed by the Secretary in consultation with the Governor 
     of New Mexico, the New Mexico State Land Commissioner, 
     affected Native American pueblos, and other interested 
     parties.

     SEC. 6. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.

       The Secretary is authorized to enter into cooperative 
     agreements with owners of non-Federal lands with regard to an 
     archaeological protection site, or portion thereof, located 
     on their property. The purpose of such an agreement shall be 
     to enable the Secretary to assist with the protection, 
     preservation, maintenance, and administration of the 
     archaeological resources and associated lands. Where 
     appropriate, a cooperative agreement may also provide for 
     public interpretation of the site.

     SEC. 7. ACQUISITIONS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to acquire 
     lands and interests therein within the boundaries of the 
     archaeological protection sites, including access thereto, by 
     donation, by purchase with donated or appropriated funds, or 
     by exchange.
       (b) Consent of Owner Required.--The Secretary may only 
     acquire lands or interests therein with the consent of the 
     owner thereof.
       (c) State Lands.--The Secretary may acquire lands or 
     interests therein owned by the State of New Mexico or a 
     political subdivision thereof only by donation or exchange, 
     except that State trust lands may only be acquired by 
     exchange.

     SEC. 8. WITHDRAWAL.

       Subject to valid existing rights, all Federal lands within 
     the archaeological protection sites are hereby withdrawn--
       (1) from all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal 
     under the public land laws and all amendments thereto;
       (2) from location, entry, and patent under the mining law 
     and all amendments thereto; and
       (3) from disposition under all laws relating to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing, and all amendments thereto.

     SEC. 9. SAVINGS PROVISIONS.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed--
       (1) to authorize the regulation of privately owned lands 
     within an area designated as an archaeological protection 
     site;
       (2) to modify, enlarge, or diminish any authority of 
     Federal, State, or local governments to regulate any use of 
     privately owned lands;
       (3) to modify, enlarge, or diminish any authority of 
     Federal, State, tribal, or local governments to manage or 
     regulate any use of land as provided for by law or 
     regulation; or
       (4) to restrict or limit a tribe from protecting cultural 
     or religious sites on tribal lands.

     SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 211. A bill to establish the Northern Rio Grande National Heritage 
Area in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation 
to establish the Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area in northern 
New Mexico. I am pleased that Senator Domenici is again joining me in 
sponsoring this bill. The Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area 
will be established as part of a collaborative effort between local 
residents, Indian tribes, businesses and local governments, who are 
working together to preserve the area.
  By establishing the Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area, I 
hope to commemorate the significant but complex heritage of northern 
New Mexico communities and Indian tribes, from the pre-Spanish 
colonization period to present day. Establishing a National Heritage 
Area will benefit the northern New Mexico communities, local residents, 
students, and visitors, as well as help the local protection and 
interpretation of the unique cultural, historical, and natural 
resources of northern New Mexico.
  Last Congress, similar legislation was considered and favorably 
reported from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and passed 
by the Senate by unanimous consent as part of a comprehensive heritage 
area bill. Unfortunately, the House was not able to consider the bill 
prior to the sine die adjournment of the Congress. Since the bill is 
non-controversial and has already passed the Senate, it is my hope that 
we will be able to move it through the Committee and to the floor as 
soon as possible.
  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. 211

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Northern Rio Grande National 
     Heritage Area Act''.

     SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) northern New Mexico encompasses a mosaic of cultures 
     and history, including eight Pueblos and the descendants of 
     Spanish ancestors who settled in the area in 1598;
       (2) the combination of cultures, languages, folk arts, 
     customs, and architecture make northern New Mexico unique;
       (3) the area includes spectacular natural, scenic, and 
     recreational resources;
       (4) there is broad support from local governments and 
     interested individuals to establish a National Heritage Area 
     to coordinate and assist in the preservation and 
     interpretation of these resources;
       (5) in 1991, the National Park Service study Alternative 
     Concepts for Commemorating Spanish Colonization identified 
     several alternatives consistent with the establishment of a 
     National Heritage Area, including conducting a comprehensive 
     archaeological and historical research program, coordinating 
     a comprehensive interpretation program, and interpreting a 
     cultural heritage scene; and
       (6) establishment of a National Heritage Area in northern 
     New Mexico would assist local communities and residents in 
     preserving these unique cultural, historical and natural 
     resources.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act--
       (1) the term ``heritage area'' means the Northern Rio 
     Grande Heritage Area; and
       (2) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the 
     Interior.

[[Page 1738]]



     SEC. 4. NORTHERN RIO GRANDE NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Establishment.--There is hereby established the 
     Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area in the State of 
     New Mexico.
       (b) Boundaries.--The heritage area shall include the 
     counties of Santa Fe, Rio Arriba, and Taos.
       (c) Management Entity.--
       (1) The Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area, Inc., a 
     non-profit corporation chartered in the State of New Mexico, 
     shall serve as the management entity for the heritage area.
       (2) The Board of Directors for the management entity shall 
     include representatives of the State of New Mexico, the 
     counties of Santa Fe, Rio Arriba and Taos, tribes and pueblos 
     within the heritage area, the cities of Santa Fe, Espanola 
     and Taos, and members of the general public. The total number 
     of Board members and the number of Directors representing 
     State, local and tribal governments and interested 
     communities shall be established to ensure that all parties 
     have appropriate representation on the Board.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORITY AND DUTIES OF THE MANAGEMENT ENTITY.

       (a) Management Plan.--
       (1) Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the management entity shall develop and forward to 
     the Secretary a management plan for the heritage area.
       (2) The management entity shall develop and implement the 
     management plan in cooperation with affected communities, 
     tribal and local governments and shall provide for public 
     involvement in the development and implementation of the 
     management plan.
       (3) The management plan shall, at a minimum--
       (A) provide recommendations for the conservation, funding, 
     management, and development of the resources of the heritage 
     area;
       (B) identify sources of funding.
       (C) include an inventory of the cultural, historical, 
     archaeological, natural, and recreational resources of the 
     heritage area;
       (D) provide recommendations for educational and 
     interpretive programs to inform the public about the 
     resources of the heritage area; and
       (E) include an analysis of ways in which local, State, 
     Federal, and tribal programs may best be coordinated to 
     promote the purposes of this Act.
       (4) If the management entity fails to submit a management 
     plan to the secretary as provided in paragraph (1), the 
     heritage area shall no longer be eligible to receive Federal 
     funding under this Act until such time as a plan is submitted 
     to the Secretary.
       (5) The Secretary shall approve or disapprove the 
     management plan within 90 days after the date of submission. 
     If the Secretary disapproves the management plan, the 
     Secretary shall advise the management entity in writing of 
     the reasons therefore and shall make recommendations for 
     revisions to the plan.
       (6) The management entity shall periodically review the 
     management plan and submit to the Secretary any 
     recommendations for proposed revisions to the management 
     plan. Any major revisions to the management plan must be 
     approved by the Secretary.
       (b) Authority.--The management entity may make grants and 
     provide technical assistance to tribal and local governments, 
     and other public and private entities to carry out the 
     management plan.
       (c) Duties.--The management entity shall--
       (1) give priority in implementing actions set forth in the 
     management plan;
       (2) coordinate with tribal and local governments to better 
     enable them to adopt land use policies consistent with the 
     goals of the management plan;
       (3) encourage by appropriate means economic viability in 
     the heritage area consistent with the goals of the management 
     plan; and
       (4) assist local and tribal governments and non-profit 
     organizations in--
       (A) establishing and maintaining interpretive exhibits in 
     the heritage area;
       (B) developing recreational resources in the heritage area;
       (C) increasing public awareness of, and appreciation for, 
     the cultural, historical, archaeological and natural 
     resources and sits in the heritage area;
       (D) the restoration of historic structures related to the 
     heritage area; and
       (E) carrying out other actions that the management entity 
     determines appropriate to fulfill the purposes of this Act, 
     consistent with the management plan.
       (d) Prohibition on Acquiring Real Property.--The management 
     entity may not use Federal funds received under this Act to 
     acquire real property or an interest in real property.
       (e) Public Meetings.--The management entity shall hold 
     public meetings at least annually regarding the 
     implementation of the management plan.
       (f) Annual Reports and Audits.--
       (1) For any year in which the management entity receives 
     Federal funds under this Act, the management entity shall 
     submit an annual report to the Secretary setting forth 
     accomplishments, expenses and income, and each entity to 
     which any grant was made by the management entity.
       (2) The management entity shall make available to the 
     Secretary for audit all records relating to the expenditure 
     of Federal funds and any matching funds. The management 
     entity shall also require, for all agreements authorizing 
     expenditure of Federal funds by other organizations, that the 
     receiving organization make available to the Secretary for 
     audit all records concerning the expenditure of those funds.

     SEC. 6. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.

       (a) Technical and Financial Assistance.--The Secretary may, 
     upon request of the management entity, provide technical and 
     financial assistance to develop and implement the management 
     plan.
       (b) Priority.--In providing assistance under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall give priority to actions that 
     facilitate--
       (1) the conservation of the significant natural, cultural, 
     historical, archaeological, scenic, and recreational 
     resources of the heritage area; and
       (2) the provision of educational, interpretive, and 
     recreational opportunities consistent with the resources and 
     associated values of the heritage area.

     SEC. 7. SAVINGS PROVISIONS.

       (a) No Effect on Private Property.--Nothing in this Act 
     shall be construed--
       (1) to modify, enlarge, or diminish any authority of 
     Federal, State, or local governments to regulate any use of 
     privately owned lands; or
       (2) to grant the management entity any authority to 
     regulate the use of privately owned lands.
       (b) Tribal Lands.--Nothing in this Act shall restrict or 
     limit a tribe from protecting cultural or religious sites on 
     tribal lands.
       (c) Authority of Governments.--Nothing in this Act shall--
       (1) modify, enlarge, or diminish any authority of Federal, 
     State, tribal, or local governments to manage or regulate any 
     use of land as provided for by law or regulation; or
       (2) authorize the management entity to assume any 
     management authorities over such lands.
       (d) Trust Responsibilities.--Nothing in this Act shall 
     diminish the Federal Government's trust responsibilities or 
     government-to-government obligations to any federally 
     recognized Indian tribe.

     SEC. 8. SUNSET.

       The authority of the Secretary to provide assistance under 
     this Act terminates on the date that is 15 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act $10,000,000, of which not more than 
     $1,000,000 may be authorized to be appropriated for any 
     fiscal year.
       (b) Cost-Sharing Requirement.--The Federal share of the 
     total cost of any activity assisted under this Act shall be 
     not more than 50 percent.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Brownback, and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 212. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
cooperate with the High Plains States in conducting a hydrogeologic 
characterization, mapping, modeling and monitoring program for the High 
Plains Aquifer, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that 
has significance for the entire Great Plains region of our Nation. It 
will establish a program for the hydrogeologic characterization, 
mapping, modeling and monitoring of the High Plains Aquifer, which 
extends from Wyoming to New Mexico and Texas. This legislation was the 
subject of a hearing last Congress before the Water and Power 
Subcommittee of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. It 
is the same as legislation that was unanimously agreed to by the full 
Senate last year. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Brownback and 
Domenici in introducing this bill.
  The High Plains Aquifer, which is comprised in large part by the 
Ogallala Aquifer, extends under eight states: Colorado, Kansas, 
Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. It is 
experiencing alarming declines in its water levels. This aquifer is the 
source of water for farmers and communities throughout the Great Plains 
region. The legislation I am introducing today is intended to ensure 
that sound and objective science is available with respect to the 
hydrology and geology of the High Plains Aquifer.
  This bill, the ``High Plains Aquifer Hydrogeologic Characterization, 
Mapping, Modeling and Monitoring Act,''

[[Page 1739]]

would direct the Secretary of the Interior to develop and carry out a 
comprehensive hydrogeologic characterization, mapping, modeling and 
monitoring program for the High Plains Aquifer. The Secretary is 
directed to work in conjunction with the eight High Plains Aquifer 
States in carrying out this program. The U.S. Geological Survey and the 
States will work in cooperation to further the goals of this program, 
with half of the available funds directed to the State component of the 
program.
  A reliable source of groundwater is essential to the well-being and 
livelihoods of people in the Great Plains region. Local towns and rural 
areas are dependent on the use of groundwater for drinking water, 
ranching, farming, and other commercial uses. Yet many areas overlying 
the Ogallala Aquifer have experienced a dramatic depletion of this 
groundwater resource. The problem we are confronting is that the 
aquifer is not sustainable, and it is being depleted rapidly. This 
threatens the way of life of all who live on the High Plains.
  The bill I am introducing today would help ensure that the relevant 
science needed to address this problem is available so that we will 
have a better understanding of the resources of the High Plains 
Aquifer. I ask that my colleagues join me in once again supporting this 
bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 212

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``High Plains Aquifer 
     Hydrogeologic Characterization, Mapping, Modeling and 
     Monitoring Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purposes of this Act:
       (1) Association.--The term ``Association'' means the 
     Association of American State Geologists.
       (2) Council.--The term ``Council'' means the Western States 
     Water Council.
       (3) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
     the United States Geological Survey.
       (4) Federal Component.--The term ``Federal component'' 
     means the Federal component of the High Plains Aquifer 
     Comprehensive Hydrogeologic Characterization, Mapping, 
     Modeling and Monitoring Program described in section 3(c).
       (5) High Plains Aquifer.--The term ``High Plains Aquifer'' 
     is the groundwater reserve depicted as Figure 1 in the United 
     States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1400-B, titled 
     ``Geohydrology of the High Plains Aquifer in Parts of 
     Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South 
     Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming.''.
       (6) High Plains Aquifer States.--The term ``High Plains 
     Aquifer States'' means the States of Colorado, Kansas, 
     Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas and 
     Wyoming.
       (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (8) State Component.--The term ``State component'' means 
     the State component of the High Plains Aquifer Comprehensive 
     Hydrogeologic Characterization, Mapping, Modeling and 
     Monitoring Program described in section 3(d).

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT.

       (a) Program.--The Secretary, working through the United 
     States Geological Survey, and in cooperation with 
     participating State geological surveys and water management 
     agencies of the High Plains Aquifer States, shall establish 
     and carry out the High Plains Aquifer Comprehensive 
     Hydrogeologic Characterization, Mapping, Modeling and 
     Monitoring Program, for the purposes of the characterization, 
     mapping, modeling, and monitoring of the High Plains Aquifer. 
     The Program shall undertake on a county-by-county level or at 
     the largest scales and most detailed levels determined to be 
     appropriate on a state-by-state and regional basis: (1) 
     mapping of the hydrogeological configuration of the High 
     Plains Aquifer; and (2) with respect to the High Plains 
     Aquifer, analyses of the current and past rates at which 
     groundwater is being withdrawn and recharged, the net rate of 
     decrease or increase in High Plains Aquifer storage, the 
     factors controlling the rate of horizontal and vertical 
     migration of water within the High Plains Aquifer, and the 
     current and past rate of change of saturated thickness within 
     the High Plains Aquifer. The Program shall also develop, as 
     recommended by the State panels referred to in subsection 
     (d)(1), regional data bases and groundwater flow models.
       (b) Funding.--The Secretary shall make available fifty 
     percent of the funds available pursuant to this title for use 
     in carrying out the State component of the Program, as 
     provided for by subsection (d).
       (c) Federal Program Component.--
       (1) Priorities.--The Program shall include a Federal 
     component, developed in consultation with the Federal Review 
     Panel provided for by subsection (e), which shall have as its 
     priorities--
       (A) coordinating Federal, State, and local, data, maps, and 
     models into an integrated physical characterization of the 
     High Plains Aquifer;
       (B) supporting State and local activities with scientific 
     and technical specialists; and
       (C) undertaking activities and providing technical 
     capabilities not available at the State and local levels.
       (2) Interdisciplinary Studies.--The Federal component shall 
     include interdisciplinary studies that add value to 
     hydrogeologic characterization, mapping, modeling and 
     monitoring for the High Plains Aquifer.
       (d) State Program Component.--
       (1) Priorities--Upon election by a High Plains Aquifer 
     State, the State may participate in the State component of 
     the Program which shall have as its priorities hydrogeologic 
     characterization, mapping, modeling, and monitoring 
     activities in areas of the High Plains Aquifer that will 
     assist in addressing issues relating to groundwater depletion 
     and resource assessment of the Aquifer. As a condition of 
     participating in the State component of the Program, the 
     Governor or Governor's designee shall appoint a State panel 
     representing a broad range of users of, and persons 
     knowledgeable regarding, hydrogeologic data and information, 
     which shall be appointed by the Governor of the State or the 
     Governor's designee. Priorities under the State component 
     shall be based upon the recommendations of the State panel.
       (2) Awards.--(A) Twenty percent of the Federal funds 
     available under the State component shall be equally divided 
     among the State geological surveys of the High Plains Aquifer 
     States to carry out the purposes of the Program provided for 
     by this title. In the event that the State geological survey 
     is unable to utilize the funding for such purposes, the 
     Secretary may, upon the petition of the Governor of the 
     State, direct the funding to some other agency of the State 
     to carry out the purposes of the Program.
       (B) In the case of a High Plains Aquifer State that has 
     elected to participate in the State component of the Program, 
     the remaining funds under the State component shall be 
     competitively awarded to State or local agencies or entities 
     in the High Plains Aquifer States, including State geological 
     surveys, State water management agencies, institutions of 
     higher education, or consortia of such agencies or entities. 
     A State may submit a proposal for the United States 
     Geological Survey to undertake activities and provide 
     technical capabilities not available at the State and local 
     levels. Such funds shall be awarded by the Director only for 
     proposals that have been recommended by the State panels 
     referred to in subsection (d)(1), subjected to independent 
     peer review, and given final prioritization and 
     recommendation by the Federal Review Panel established under 
     subsection (e). Proposals for multistate activities must be 
     recommended by the State panel of at least one of the 
     affected States.
       (e) Federal Review Panel.--
       (1) Establishment.--There shall be established a Federal 
     Review Panel to evaluate the proposals submitted for funding 
     under the State component under subsection (d)(2)(B) and to 
     recommend approvals and levels of funding. In addition, the 
     Federal Review Panel shall review and coordinate the Federal 
     component priorities under subsection (c)(1), Federal 
     interdisciplinary studies under subsection (c)(2), and the 
     State component priorities under subsection (d)(1).
       (2) Composition and Support.--Not later than 3 months after 
     the date of enactment of this title, the Secretary shall 
     appoint to the Federal Review Panel: (1) three 
     representatives of the United States Geological Survey, at 
     least one of which shall be a hydrologist or hydrogeologist; 
     and (2) four representatives of the geological surveys and 
     water management agencies of the High Plains Aquifer States 
     from lists of nominees provided by the Association and the 
     Council, so that there are two representatives of the State 
     geological surveys and two representatives of the State water 
     management agencies. Appointment to the Panel shall be for a 
     term of 3 years. The Director shall provide technical and 
     administrative support to the Federal Review Panel. Expenses 
     for the Federal Review Panel shall be paid from funds 
     available under the Federal component of the Program.
       (f) Limitation.--The United States Geological Survey shall 
     not use any of the Federal funds to be made available under 
     the State component for any fiscal year to pay indirect, 
     servicing, or Program management charges. Recipients of 
     awards granted under subsection (d)(2)(B) shall not use more 
     than 18 percent of the Federal award amount for any fiscal 
     year for indirect, servicing, or Program management charges. 
     The Federal share of the costs of an activity funded under

[[Page 1740]]

     subsection (d)(2)(B) shall be no more than 50 percent of the 
     total cost of that activity. The Secretary may apply the 
     value of in-kind contributions of property and services to 
     the non-Federal share of the costs of the activity.

     SEC. 4. PLAN.

       The Secretary, acting through the Director, shall, in 
     consultation with the Association, the Council, the Federal 
     Review Panel, and the State panels, prepare a plan for the 
     High Plains Aquifer Comprehensive Hydrogeologic 
     Characterization, Mapping, Modeling and Monitoring Program. 
     The plan shall address overall priorities for the Program and 
     a management structure and Program operations, including the 
     role and responsibilities of the United States Geological 
     Survey and the States in the Program, and mechanisms for 
     identifying priorities for the Federal component and the 
     State component.

     SEC. 5. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Report on Program Implementation.--One year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter 
     through fiscal year 2011, the Secretary shall submit a report 
     on the status of implementation of the Program established by 
     this Act to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of 
     the Senate, the Committee on Resources of the House of 
     Representatives, and the Governors of the High Plains Aquifer 
     States. The initial report submitted by the Secretary shall 
     contain the plan required by section 4.
       (b) Report on High Plains Aquifer.--One year after the date 
     of enactment of this Act and every year thereafter through 
     fiscal year 2011, the Secretary shall submit a report to the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, the 
     Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives, and 
     the Governors of the High Plains Aquifer States on the status 
     of the High Plains Aquifer, including aquifer recharge rates, 
     extraction rates, saturated thickness, and water table 
     levels.
       (c) Role of Federal Review Panel.--The Federal Review Panel 
     shall be given an opportunity to review and comment on the 
     reports required by this section.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of the fiscal years 2003 through 2011 to 
     carry out this Act .
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 213. A bill to clear title to certain real property in New Mexico 
associated with the Middle Rio Grande Project, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the 
Albuquerque Biological Park Title Clarification Act with the support of 
my colleague Senator Domenici. This bill, which passed the Senate 
during the 107th Congress, would assist the City of Albuquerque, by 
clearing its title to two parcels of land located along the Rio Grande. 
More specifically, it would allow the City to move forward with its 
plans to improve the properties as part of a Biological Park Project, a 
city funded initiative to create a premier environmental educational 
center for its citizens and the entire State of New Mexico.
  The Biological Park Project has been in the works since 1987 when the 
City began to develop an aquarium and botanic garden along the banks of 
the Rio Grande. The facilities constitute just a portion of the overall 
project. In pursuit of the balance of the project, the City, in 1997, 
purchased two properties from the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy 
District, (MRGCD), for $3,875,000. The first property, Tingley Beach 
has been leased by the City from MRGCD since 1931 and used for public 
park purposes. The second property, San Gabriel Park, has been leased 
by the City since 1963, and also used for public park purposes.
  In the year 2000, the City's plans were interrupted when the U.S. 
Bureau of Reclamation asserted that in 1953, it had acquired ownership 
of all of MRGCD's property associated with the Middle Rio Grande 
Project. The United States' assertion called into question the validity 
of the 1997 transaction between the City and MRGCD. Both MRGCD and the 
City dispute the United States' claim of ownership.
  This dispute is delaying the City's progress in developing the 
Biological Park Project. If the matter is simply left to litigation, 
the delay will be both indefinite and unnecessary. Reclamation has 
already determined that the two properties are surplus to the needs of 
the Middle Rio Grande Project. Moreover, the record indicates that 
Reclamation had once considered releasing its interest in the 
properties for $1.00 each. Obviously, the Federal interest in these 
properties is low while the local interest is very high. This bill is 
narrowly tailored to address this local interest, affecting only the 
two properties at issue. The general dispute concerning title to 
project works is left for the courts to decide.
  I hope my colleagues will work with me to help resolve this issue 
which is important to the citizens of my State. While much of what we 
do here in the Congress is complex and time-consuming work, we should 
also have the ability to move quickly when necessary and appropriate to 
solve local problems caused by Federal actions. I therefore urge my 
colleagues to support 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. 213

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Albuquerque Biological Park 
     Title Clarification Act''.

     SEC 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that:
       (1) In 1997, the City of Albuquerque, New Mexico paid 
     $3,875,000 to the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District to 
     acquire two parcels of land known as Tingley Beach and San 
     Gabriel Park.
       (2) The City intends to develop and improve Tingley Beach 
     and San Gabriel Park as part of its Albuquerque Biological 
     Park Project.
       (3) In 2000, the United States claimed title to Tingley 
     Beach and San Gabriel Park by asserting that these properties 
     were transferred to the United States in the 1950's as part 
     of the establishment of the Middle Rio Grande Project.
       (4) The City's ability to continue developing the 
     Albuquerque Biological Park Project has been hindered by the 
     United States claim of title to these properties.
       (5) The United States claim of ownership over the Middle 
     Rio Grande Project properties is disputed by the City and 
     MRGCD in Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. John W. Keys, III, No. 
     CV 99-1320 JP/RLP-ACE (D. N.M. filed Nov. 15, 1999).
       (6) Tingley Beach and San Gabriel Park are surplus to the 
     needs of the Bureau of Reclamation and the United States in 
     administering the Middle Rio Grande Project.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to direct the 
     Secretary of the Interior to issue a quitclaim deed conveying 
     any right, title, and interest the United States may have in 
     and to Tingley Beach or San Gabriel Park to the City, thereby 
     removing the cloud on the City's title to these lands.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) City.--The term ``City'' means the City of Albuquerque, 
     New Mexico.
       (2) Middle rio grande conservancy district.--The terms 
     ``Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District'' and ``MRGCD'' mean 
     a political subdivision of the State of New Mexico, created 
     in 1925 to provide and maintain flood protection and 
     drainage, and maintenance of ditches, canals, and 
     distribution systems for irrigation and water delivery and 
     operations in the Middle Rio Grande Valley.
       (3) Middle rio grande project.--The term ``Middle Rio 
     Grande Project'' means the works associated with water 
     deliveries and operations in the Rio Grande basin as 
     authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1948 (Public Law 80-
     858; 62 Stat. 1175) and the Flood Control Act of 1950 (Public 
     Law 81-516; 64 Stat. 170).
       (4) San gabriel park.--The term ``San Gabriel Park'' means 
     the tract of land containing 40.2236 acres, more or less, 
     situated within Section 12 and Section 13, T10N, R2E, 
     N.M.P.M., City of Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico, 
     and described by New Mexico State Plane Grid Bearings 
     (Central Zone) and ground distances in a Special Warranty 
     Deed conveying the property from MRGCD to the City, dated 
     November 25, 1997.
       (5) Tingley beach.--The term ``Tingley Beach'' means the 
     tract of land containing 25.2005 acres, more or less, 
     situated within Section 13 and Section 24, T10N, R2E, 
     N.M.P.M., City of Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico, 
     and described by New Mexico State Plane Grid Bearings 
     (Central Zone) and ground distances in a Special Warranty 
     Deed conveying the property from MRGCD to the City, dated 
     November 25, 1997.

     SEC. 4. CLARIFICATION OF PROPERTY INTEREST.

       (a) Required Action.--The Secretary of the Interior shall 
     issue a quitclaim deed conveying any right, title, and 
     interest the United States may have in and to Tingley Beach 
     and San Gabriel Park to the City.

[[Page 1741]]

       (b) Timing.--The Secretary shall carry out the action in 
     subsection (a) as soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this title and in accordance with all applicable 
     law.
       (c) No Additional Payment.--The City shall not be required 
     to pay any additional costs to the United States for the 
     value of San Gabriel Park and Tingley Beach.

     SEC. 5. OTHER RIGHTS, TITLE, AND INTERESTS UNAFFECTED.

       (a) In general.--Except as expressly provided in section 4, 
     nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect any right, 
     title, or interest in and to any land associated with the 
     Middle Rio Grande Project.
       (b) Ongoing Litigation.--Nothing contained in this Act 
     shall be construed or utilized to affect or otherwise 
     interfere with any position set forth by any party in the 
     lawsuit pending before the United States District Court for 
     the District of New Mexico, No. CV 99-1320 JP/RLP-ACE, 
     entitled Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. John W. Keys, III, 
     concerning the right, title, or interest in and to any 
     property associated with the Middle Rio Grande Project.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 214. A bill to designate Fort Bayard Historic District in the 
State of New Mexico as a National Historic Landmark, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my 
colleague Senator Domenici, legislation to designate Fort Bayard in New 
Mexico as a National Historic Landmark.
  Fort Bayard is significant not only for the role it played as a 
military post in fostering early settlement in the region, but for its 
role as a nationally important tuberculosis sanatorium and hospital. 
During the 99 years spanning its establishment in 1866 through its 
closing as a Veterans Administration hospital in 1965, Fort Bayard 
served as the most prominent evidence of the Federal Government's role 
in southwestern New Mexico. Fort Bayard has recently been listed on the 
National Register of Historic Places in recognition of the historical 
significance of the site.
  From 1866 to 1899, Fort Bayard functioned as an Army post while its 
soldiers, many of them African-American, or Buffalo Soldiers, protected 
settlers working in the nearby mining district. These Buffalo Soldiers 
were a mainstay of the Army during the late Apache wars and fought 
heroically in numerous skirmishes. Like many soldiers who served at 
Fort Bayard, some of the Buffalo Soldiers remained in the area 
following their discharge. Lines of headstones noting the names of men 
and their various Buffalo Soldier units remain in the older section of 
what is now the National Cemetery. In 1992, these soldiers were 
recognized for their bravery when a Buffalo Soldier Memorial statue was 
dedicated at the center of the Fort Bayard parade ground. It gradually 
became apparent that the Army's extensive frontier fort system was no 
longer necessary. By 1890, it was clear that the era of the western 
frontier, at least from the Army's perspective, had ended. Fort Bayard 
was scheduled for closure in 1899.
  Even as the last detachment of the 9th U.S. Cavalry prepared to 
depart the discontinued post, new federal occupants were arriving at 
Fort Bayard. On August 28, 1899, the War Department authorized the 
surgeon-general to establish a general hospital for use as a military 
sanatorium. This would be the first sanatorium dedicated to the 
treatment of officers and enlisted men of the Army suffering from 
pulmonary tuberculosis. At 6,100 ft. and with a dry, sunny climate, the 
fort lay within what proponents of climatological therapy termed the 
``zone of immunity.'' By 1919, the cumulative effect of over 15 years 
of construction and improvement projects was the creation of a small, 
nearly self-sufficient community.
  In 1920, the War Department closed the sanatorium and the United 
States Public Health Service assumed control of the facility. A second 
phase occurred in 1922 when a new agency, the Veterans' Bureau, was 
created within the Treasury Department and charged with operating 
hospitals throughout the country whose clientele were veterans 
requiring medical services. As a result, in the summer of 1922 the 
United States General Hospital at Fort Bayard was transferred to the 
Veterans' Bureau and became known as United States Veterans' Hospital 
No. 55. Its mission of treating those afflicted with tuberculosis, 
however, remained the same.
  By 1965, there was no longer a need for a tuberculosis facility 
located at a high elevation in a dry climate, and the Veterans' 
Administration decided to close the hospital in that year. However, in 
part because of the concerns of the local communities that depended 
upon the hospital, the State of New Mexico assumed responsibility for 
the facility and 484 acres of the former military reservation. Since 
then, the State has used it for geriatric, as well as drug and alcohol 
rehabilitation and orthopedic programs. Because of the extensive 
cemetery dating to the fort and sanatorium eras at Fort Bayard, the 
State of New Mexico transferred 16 acres in 1975 for the creation of 
the Fort Bayard National Cemetery, administered by the Veterans' 
Administration.
  For these and many other reasons, I believe it is clear that Fort 
Bayard is historically significant and merits recognition as a National 
Historic Landmark. Fort Bayard illuminates a rich and complex story 
that is important to the entire nation.
  Last Congress identical legislation was considered and favorably 
reported by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and included in 
a larger package of public land bills which passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent. Since there is broad local support for the bill, and 
it has already received the approval of the Senate, it is my hope that 
we can expeditiously consider the bill this year.
  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. 214

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Fort Bayard National 
     Historic Landmark Act''.

     SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) Fort Bayard, located in southwest New Mexico, was an 
     Army post from 1866 and 1899, and served an important role in 
     the settlement of New Mexico;
       (2) among the troops stationed at the fort were several 
     ``Buffalo Soldier'' units who fought in the Apache Wars;
       (3) following its closure as a military post, Fort Bayard 
     was established by the War Department as general hospital for 
     use as a military sanatorium;
       (4) in 1965 the State of New Mexico assumed management of 
     the site and currently operates the Fort Bayard State 
     Hospital;
       (5) the Fort Bayard historic site has been listed on the 
     National Register of Historic Places in recognition of the 
     national significance of its history, both as a military fort 
     and as an historic medical facility.

     SEC. 3. FORT BAYARD NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK.

       (a) Designation.--The Fort Bayard Historic District in 
     Grant County, New Mexico, as listed on the National Register 
     of Historic Places, is hereby designated as the Fort Bayard 
     National Historic Landmark.
       (b) Administration.--
       (1) Consistent with the Department of the Interior's 
     regulations concerning National Historic Landmarks (36 C.F.R. 
     Part 65), designation of the Fort Bayard Historic District as 
     a National Historic Landmark shall not prohibit under Federal 
     law or regulations any actions which may otherwise be taken 
     by the property owner with respect to the property.
       (2) Nothing in this Act shall affect the administration of 
     the Fort Bayard Historic District by the State of New Mexico.

     SEC. 4. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     State of New Mexico, may enter into cooperative agreements 
     with appropriate public or private entities, for the purpose 
     of protecting historic resources at Fort Bayard and providing 
     educational and interpretive facilities and programs for the 
     public. The Secretary shall not enter into any agreement or 
     provide assistance to any activity affecting Fort Bayard 
     State Hospital without the concurrence of the State of 
     Mexico.
       (b) Technical and Financial Assistance.--The Secretary may 
     provide technical and financial assistance with any entity 
     with which the Secretary has entered into a cooperative 
     agreement under subsection (a) in furtherance of the 
     agreement.

[[Page 1742]]



     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Bond, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
        Lieberman, Mr. Gregg, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Johnson, Mrs. Clinton, 
        Mr. Breaux, and Mr. Feingold):
  S. 215. A bill to authorize funding assistance for the States for the 
discharge of homeland security activities by the National Guard; to the 
Committee on Armed Services.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to 
give the National Guard an enhanced role in homeland security. I am 
pleased that Senators Bond, Leahy, Lieberman, Gregg, Murray, Johnson, 
Clinton, Breaux, and Feingold join me as cosponsors of the bill.
  In essence, the bill would permit each governor to create a homeland 
security activities plan for the National Guard in his or her State, 
and authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide oversight and funding 
for such plans.
  The legislation is modeled after the existing successful National 
Guard counterdrug program, which was established under 32 U.S.C. sect. 
112.
  Under this program, the National Guard is used to provide support to 
law enforcement to help stop illegal drugs from being imported, 
manufactured, and distributed, and in supporting drug demand reduction 
programs.
  The bill is supported by the co-chairs of the Senate National Guard 
Caucus, the National Governors' Association, the Adjutants General 
Association of the United States, the National Guard Association of the 
United States, and National Guardsmen across the country.
  Giving the Guard an enhanced role in homeland security makes sense 
because the Guard connects local communities to the Federal Government, 
is located in almost every American community, and has the 
capabilities, legal authority, and structure to help respond to attacks 
on the homeland.
  In addition, such an enhanced role would return the National Guard 
more to what was envisioned by the founders of this country.
  Colonial militias protected their fellow citizens from Indian attack, 
foreign invaders, and later helped win the Revolutionary War.
  And during the 19th century, the militia provided the bulk of the 
troops during the Mexican war, the early years of the Civil War, and 
the Spanish-American War.
  It was not until 1903 that Congress passed legislation to increase 
the role of the National Guard as a Reserve force for the U.S. Army
  Now, the National Guard has a dual Federal/State mission. In their 
role as State militias, Guard units are often activated for homeland 
duty under Title 32 and thus come under the command of the State 
governor.
  In this status, they are exempt from the Posse Comitatus Act, which 
generally restricts law enforcement to civil authorities, and thus are 
used as the armed forces' primary provider of support to civil 
authorities.
  The National Guard's access to military command and control, 
discipline, training, and equipment also makes it well suited to 
coordinate with and aid police, fire, medical, and other emergency 
responders.
  The Army National Guard maintains over 3,000 armories around the 
Nation and the Air National Guard has 140 units throughout the United 
States.
  There are about 460,000 National Guard members that train throughout 
the year, 353,000 Army National Guard and 106,000 Air National Guard.
  The approximate numbers of National Guard in individual States run 
from about 1,000 to 21,000, and vary according to the population of the 
State and recruitment efforts.
  In light of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and 
Pentagon as well as the October 2001 anthrax attacks on Congress and 
the media, many of us have come to believe that the National Guard 
should play a more central role in responding to terrorist attacks, 
particularly those with weapons of mass destruction.
  In fact, the Guard has already played an important role in helping 
respond to these attacks, not only at the site of the attacks but also 
at airports, around the Capitol, and elsewhere.
  For example, the National Guard currently has a number of Civil 
Support Teams that assess a suspected weapon of mass destruction event, 
advise first responders, and facilitate the assistance of additional 
military forces, if needed.
  The National Guard is well-suited to performing an enhanced homeland 
security mission for many reasons. These reasons include that the fact 
the Guard is already: deployed in communities around the country; 
integrated into existing local, State, and regional emergency response 
networks; has ties with key players in local, State, and Federal 
government; is not bound by the Posse Comitatus Act while serving in 
Title 32 status and thus has maximum flexibility; is responsible for 
and experienced with homeland security missions, including air 
sovereignty, disaster relief, responding to suspected weapons of mass 
destruction events, and counterdrug operations; has existing physical, 
communications, and training infrastructure throughout the U.S.; has 
existing training facilities, distance learning training networks, and 
a number of highly skilled individuals who have left active forces; and 
helps preserve constitutional balance between State and Federal 
sovereign interests, given its unique dual State/Federal role.
  Moreover, Department of Defense reviews and reports, including the 
2001 Quadrennial Defense Review and Reserve Component Employment 2005 
Study, have made clear that the National Guard should have an expanded 
role in homeland security.
  Other experts agree. The Hart-Rudman and Gilmore terrorism 
commissions as well as the recent Hart-Rudman Terrorism Task Force have 
recommended that the National Guard be given a more direct role in the 
war on terrorism.
  In sum, this legislation is a sensible, efficient way to make our 
country safer from terrorism. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to pass it.
  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. 215

       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 ``Guaranteeing a United and 
     Resolute Defense Act of 2003'' or the ``GUARD Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR HOMELAND SECURITY ACTIVITIES 
                   OF THE NATIONAL GUARD.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 32, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 112 the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 112a. Homeland security activities

       ``(a) Funding Assistance.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may 
     provide funds to the Governor of a State who submits to the 
     Secretary a homeland security activities plan satisfying the 
     requirements of subsection (b).
       ``(2) To be eligible for assistance under this subsection, 
     a State shall have a homeland security activities plan in 
     effect.
       ``(3) Any funds provided to a State under this subsection 
     shall be used for the following:
       ``(A) Pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities, 
     travel, and related expenses, as authorized by State law, of 
     personnel of the National Guard of the State for service 
     performed for the purpose of homeland security while not in 
     Federal service.
       ``(B) Operation and maintenance of the equipment and 
     facilities of the National Guard of the State that are used 
     for the purpose of homeland security.
       ``(C) Procurement of services and the purchase or leasing 
     of equipment for the National Guard of the State for use for 
     the purpose of homeland security.
       ``(b) Homeland Security Activities Plan Requirements.--The 
     homeland security activities plan of a State--
       ``(1) shall specify how personnel and equipment of the 
     National Guard of the State are to be used in homeland 
     security activities and include a detailed explanation of the 
     reasons why the National Guard should be used for the 
     specified activities;
       ``(2) shall describe in detail how any available National 
     Guard training facilities, including any distance learning 
     programs and projects, are to be used;
       ``(3) shall include the Governor's certification that the 
     activities under the plan are

[[Page 1743]]

     to be conducted at a time when the personnel involved are not 
     in Federal service;
       ``(4) shall include the Governor's certification that 
     participation by National Guard personnel in the activities 
     under the plan is service in addition to training required 
     under section 502 of this title;
       ``(5) shall include a certification by the Attorney General 
     of the State (or, in the case of a State with no position of 
     Attorney General, a civilian official of the State equivalent 
     to a State attorney general) that the use of the National 
     Guard of the State for the activities proposed under the plan 
     is authorized by, and is consistent with, State law;
       ``(6) shall include the Governor's certification that the 
     Governor or a civilian law enforcement official of the State 
     designated by the Governor has determined that any activities 
     to be carried out in conjunction with Federal law enforcement 
     agencies under the plan serve a State law enforcement 
     purpose; and
       ``(7) may provide for the use of personnel and equipment of 
     the National Guard of that State to assist the Directorate of 
     Immigration Affairs of the Department of Homeland Security in 
     the transportation of aliens who have violated a Federal or 
     State law prohibiting terrorist acts.
       ``(c) Examination and Approval of Plan.--The Secretary of 
     Defense shall examine the adequacy of each homeland security 
     activities plan of a State and, if the plan is determined 
     adequate, approve the plan.
       ``(d) Annual Report.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to Congress each year a report on the assistance 
     provided under this section during the preceding fiscal year, 
     including the activities carried out with such assistance.
       ``(2) The annual report under this subsection shall include 
     the following:
       ``(A) A description of the homeland security activities 
     conducted under the homeland security activities plans with 
     funds provided under this section.
       ``(B) An accounting of the funds provided to each State 
     under this section.
       ``(C) An analysis of the effects on military training and 
     readiness of using units and personnel of the National Guard 
     to perform activities under the homeland security activities 
     plans.
       ``(e) Statutory Construction.--Nothing in this section 
     shall be construed as limiting the authority of any unit of 
     the National Guard of a State, when such unit is not in 
     Federal service, to perform law enforcement functions 
     authorized to be performed by the National Guard by the laws 
     of the State concerned.
       ``(f) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `Governor', in the case of the District of 
     Columbia, means the commanding general of the National Guard 
     of the District of Columbia.
       ``(2) The term `homeland security activities', with respect 
     to the National Guard of a State, means the use of National 
     Guard personnel, when authorized by the law of the State and 
     requested by the Governor of the State, to prevent, deter, 
     defend against, and respond to an attack or threat of attack 
     on the people and territory of the United States.
       ``(3) The term `State' includes the District of Columbia, 
     the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin 
     Islands.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 1 of such title is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 112 the following new 
     item:

``112a. Homeland security activities.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. EDWARDS:
  S. 216. A bill to authorize the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology to develop improvements in building and fire codes, 
standards, and practices to reduce the impact of terrorist and other 
extreme threats to the safety of buildings, their occupants, and 
emergency responders, and to authorize the Department of Homeland 
Security to form a task force to recommend ways to strengthen standards 
in the private security industry, stabilize the workforce, and create a 
safer environment for commercial building and industrial facility 
occupants; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, as we all know, when terrorists struck 
America on September 11, 2001, the greatest loss of life occurred when 
the World Trade Center's two towers fell. These two towers were symbols 
of America's strength and prosperity, and they were reduced to rubble 
by the two massive blows.
  As we continue securing America against terrorist attacks, we need to 
give more attention to the security of large buildings, especially 
skyscrapers and arenas. There are approximately 500 skyscrapers in the 
United States that are regularly occupied by at least 5000 people, and 
there are 250 major arenas and stadiums that hold many times more. 
These buildings will be primary targets of potential terrorist attack. 
We must do more to ensure that these buildings are secure.
  That is why I am introducing today the Building Security Act of 2003. 
The bill does two things: first, it supports the research and funding 
we need so that buildings can withstand extreme assaults, including 
terrorist attacks. Second, the bill takes steps so that buildings will 
be guarded by a security workforce that is adequately prepared to 
respond to these dangers.
  Consider the construction of large buildings. Today, many older 
buildings lack fire retardants and blast-resistant materials that can 
save hundreds of lives in a disaster. As a result of the study of the 
attack on the Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995, we know that 
design changes that would have increased building costs by only 1 to 2 
percent might have saved as many of 85 percent of the people killed in 
that attack. The early reports on the World Trade Center collapse have 
suggested that the two towers could have endured the impact of the 
planes, but that the extraordinary heat generated by the explosions 
weakened the steel structure of those buildings. Advanced technologies 
in building construction would surely have slowed their collapse. On 
the positive side, we know that improvements in the construction of the 
Pentagon mitigated the loss of life; the plane struck the Pentagon on 
the one side of the building where the windows were blast-resistant and 
the structural columns had been reinforced. Those changes likely saved 
many lives.
  There are new, better construction practices and materials out there, 
but we are not using them as much as we should. Part of the reason is 
that today, our Nation's brightest scientists and most innovative 
companies do not have the resources needed to research, create, and 
implement these practices. We must enable these people to develop new 
methods and materials, and help industry meet the higher standards we 
need, and we must do all that as quickly and efficient as possible.
  The bill I introduce today will provide $40 million for the National 
Institutes of Science and Technology, or NIST, to help improve 
construction standards. The needed research is happening now, but it 
needs to move much more quickly. This legislation will do three things: 
1. undertake an intensive national research effort to determine both 
how to build strong buildings, and how to improve building codes and 
standards; 2. specifically research the question of how to ensure that 
these higher standards are actually met, whether by mandates, tax 
credits, or other incentives; and 3. provide technical guidance to 
builders in adopting the new standards and codes.
  We also must address standards for private security officers. Our 
country's buildings are staffed by almost two million private security 
officers. While they have the critical responsibility of preventing 
emergencies and protecting building occupants from harm, these officers 
are often inadequately trained or compensated to do so. The industry 
suffers from low retention, deficient training, and meager salaries. 
The job turnover rate within the private security industry is as high 
as 300 percent per year. Recent studies show that 4 in 10 private 
security officers report no new security measures in their buildings 
since September 11, and 7 in 10 report that their buildings never 
conduct evacuation and emergency drills. And over half of the States 
have no clear oversight for their respective private security 
industries, nor do they have standards or screening requirements for 
new hires.
  This legislation authorizes a review of the private security industry 
by a commission in the Department of Homeland Security that includes 
all those with critical knowledge of the industry. The commission is 
tasked with establishing industry guidelines and standards and 
developing a means to implement those guidelines and standards in a 
timely way.
  Our Nation's buildings have been targeted before, and I believe that 
they will be targeted again. We must do

[[Page 1744]]

much more to make these buildings secure. This bill is important step 
in the right direction.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 217. A bill to reinstate felony penalties for licensed gun dealers 
who fail to maintain records of sales; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that could 
have a large impact on reducing gun violence in this country.
  Last fall, two snipers terrorized the Washington, D.C. metropolitan 
area, killing ten victims and wounding others including children. Among 
the weapons used by the snipers was a high powered military-style 
assault rifle known as a Bushmaster XM15. Following the arrest of 
sniper suspects John Mohammed and John Lee Malvo, this weapon was 
linked to killings in Maryland, Virginia,Louisiana, and Alabama.
  Agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms traced the 
Bushmaster weapon to a Tacoma, Washington gun dealership, the Bull's 
Eye Shooter Supply. Investigators even found the empty box in which the 
weapon was shipped.
  But What the agents did not find was any record of the sale of the 
weapon because the gun dealer did not keep adequate records. If the gun 
was bought from Bull's Eye, we do not know when because there is no 
record of the Sale. There is no record of a gun application or a 
background check for John Mohammed. Had a background check been carried 
out, John Mohammed would not have obtained the weapon because a 
domestic violence restraining order had been field against him.
  What is the weapon was stolen? If the owner of Bull's Eye had kept 
proper records and followed Federal law, he would have reported the 
weapon missing or stolen when it disappeared from the store. The 
knowledge that a Bushmaster XM15 was missing from a Tacoma area weapons 
store could have greatly aided investigators looking into the case.
  The sloppy recordkeeping for this particular weapon was not an 
isolated case. it has been learned that inspectors had uncovered 
record-keeping violations in audits at Bull's Eye in 1998, 2000 and 
2001. A total of 160 missing guns could not be accounted for in the 
2000 audit.
  This type of shoddy recordkeeping is dangerous. A small percentage of 
licensed dealers are responsible for a disproportionate number of crime 
guns. Specifically, 1.2 percent of all licensed gun dealers are 
responsible for the original sale of 57 percent of all firearms used in 
crimes, according to data from the ATF.
  Gun dealers are not being punished when they ignore Federal 
recordkeeping laws. Why? Because in 1986, the National Rifle 
Association pushed a law through Congress that significantly weakened 
penalties for poor recordkeeping reducing maximum jail time for five 
years to one year. This meant that the crime was reduced from a felony 
to a misdemeanor. With this change, the undermanned and underfunded 
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Federal prosecutors simply 
could not afford to bring cases against gun dealers for misdemeanor 
violations.
  It is time we restore record keeping violations to a felony and that 
is what my bill does. It is not a new gun law. It is merely making the 
penalties tougher for violations for existing law. Regardless of 
whether you support or oppose additional gun laws, we all agree that we 
need strong enforcement of existing laws. My bill would make 
enforcement easier and tougher. I hope my colleagues will support this 
common-sense legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the 
bill and a letter of support from the Violence Policy Center be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 217

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

     SECTION 1. REINSTATEMENT OF CRIMINAL FELONY PENALTIES FOR 
                   FAILURE TO MAINTAIN RECORDS OF FIREARMS SALES.

       Section 924(a)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``one year'' and inserting ``5 years''.
                                  ____



                                       Violence Policy Center,

                                 Washington, DC, January 21, 2003.
     Hon. Barbara Boxer,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Boxer: The Violence Policy strongly endorses 
     your legislation to reinstate felony penalties for firearm 
     recordkeeping violations. That this legislation is urgently 
     needed is highlighted by the circumstances surrounding the 
     tragic Washington-area sniper shootings. Bull's Eye Shooter 
     Supply, the gun dealer in Washington state from which the 
     snipers acquired their Bushmaster XM15 assault rifle, had no 
     record of the gun leaving its inventory. The store simply 
     could not account for the disposition of the gun used to kill 
     10 and wound three in a shooting spree that terrorized the 
     Washington metropolitan area.
       This is not surprising taking into account the feeble 
     penalties that currently apply to gun dealers who fail to 
     keep adequate records. Your legislation would simply restore 
     the felony penalty that applied until legislation backed by 
     the National Rifle Association reduced it to a misdemeanor in 
     1986.
       At the time, the Reagan Administration agreed that reducing 
     recordkeeping violations to a misdemeanor was a dangerous 
     idea. In 1986, the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 
     and Firearms (ATF) identified this penalty change as a 
     ``weakness'' of the legislation in which it was included. In 
     a memorandum to the Department of the Treasury's Assistant 
     Secretary for Enforcement, the ATF Director wrote, ``By 
     reducing all licensee recordkeeping violations to 
     misdemeanors, serious violations could not be adequately 
     prosecuted and punished, i.e., a dealer's sale of firearms 
     off-record and his willful refusal to make or maintain any 
     required record could only be prosecuted as misdemeanors.''
       It's time to put the teeth back in dealer recordkeeping 
     enforcement. The Violence Policy Center strongly supports 
     swift passage of the Boxer legislation to reinstate felony 
     penalties for failure to maintain records of firearms 
     transfers.
           Sincerely,
                                                  M. Kristen Rand,
                                             Legislative Director.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. McCain, Mr. Hollings, and Mr. 
        Kerry):
  S. 218. A bill to amend the Coastal Zone Management Act; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to support the Coastal Zone 
Enhancement Reauthorization of 2003. I am pleased to have bipartisan 
support for this bill and to be joined by the Chair and Ranking 
Democrats of the Commerce Committee and the Subcommittee on Oceans and 
Fisheries. Senators McCain, Hollings, and Kerry have been instrumental 
in developing the wide range of support for this bill and I appreciate 
their interest in improving the way we manage our Nation's valuable 
coastal and marine resources.
  In 1972, Congress responded to concerns over the increasing demands 
being placed on our Nation's coastal regions and resources by enacting 
of the Coastal Zone Management Act. These pressures have greatly 
increased since the Act was originally authorized.
  Although the coastal zone only comprises 10 percent of the contiguous 
U.S. land area, nearly 53 percent of all Americans live in these 
coastal regions, and more than 3,600 people are relocating there 
annually. This small portion of our country supports approximately 361 
sea ports, contains most of our largest cities, and serves as critical 
habitat for a variety of plants and animals.
  This bill reauthorizes and makes a number of important improvements 
to the Coastal Zone Management Act. Under the authorities in this Act, 
coastal States can choose to participate in the voluntary Federal 
Coastal Zone Management Program. States then design individual coastal 
zone management programs, taking their specific needs and problems into 
account, and then receive Federal matching funds to help carry out 
their program plans. State coastal zone programs manage issues ranging 
from public access to beaches, to protecting habitat, to coordinating 
permits for coastal development.
  As a voluntary program, the framework of the CZMA provides guidelines

[[Page 1745]]

for State plans to address multiple environmental, societal, cultural, 
and economic objectives.
  The health of our coastal zone is vitally important not only to the 
multitude of plants and animals that inhabit this area, but also to the 
people and communities that are dependent on it for their livelihood. 
For example, coastal areas provide habitat for more than 75 percent of 
the U.S. commercial fisheries and 85 percent of the U.S. recreational 
fisheries. In turn, the commercial fishing industry, along with value-
added services included, contributes $40 billion to the U.S. economy 
each year. Recreational fishing adds another $25 billion to the 
economy.
  The Coastal Zone Management Program can be used to help balance the 
conservation of fish stocks with the demands that we place on coastal 
areas. In my State of Maine, a $150,000 study of the State's cargo 
needs led to a $27 million bond issue for cargo port improvements. As a 
result, Bath Iron Works built a new $45 million facility, creating 
1,000 new jobs. Similar work needs to be done with our fishing ports so 
that when fisheries stock rebound, the fishermen will be able to 
realize the returns.
  Unfortunately our precious coastal resources are being threatened by 
environmental problems, including non-point source pollution. Although 
the States are currently taking action to address this problem under 
existing authority, the Coastal Zone Enhancement Reauthorization of 
2003 encourages, but does not require them to take additional steps to 
combat these problems through the Coastal Community Program.
  This initiative provides States with the funding and flexibility 
needed to deal with their specific non-point source pollution problems. 
The States will have the ability to implement local solutions to a 
broad array of local problems. Many States are actively engaged in non-
point source pollution programs and all can benefit from this new tool. 
I'm proud to say that Maine has risen to the challenge and already 
spends close to 30 percent of its funding on such activities. This has 
led to the reopening of hundreds of acres of shellfish beds and the 
restoration of fish nursery areas. Even with these successes, Maine is 
looking forward to this new opportunity to do more.
  The Coastal Community Program in this bill also aids States in 
developing and implementing creative initiatives to deal with problems 
other than on-point source pollution. It increases Federal and State 
support of local community-based programs that address coastal 
environmental issues, such as the impact of development and sprawl on 
coastal uses and resources. This type of bottom-up management approach 
is critical.
  The Coastal Zone Enhancement Reauthorization of 2003 significantly 
increases the authorization levels for the Coastal Zone Management 
Program, allowing States to better address their coastal management 
plan goals. The bill authorizes $135.5 million for fiscal year 2003, 
$141 million for fiscal year 2005 and increases the authorization 
levels by $5.5 million each year through fiscal year 2008. This 
increase in funding is necessary to allow the coastal programs to reach 
their full potential.
  Additionally, the Coastal Zone Enhancement Reauthorization of 2003 
increases authorization for the National Estuarine Research Reserve 
System, NERRS, to $13 million in fiscal year 2004 with an additional $1 
million increase each year through fiscal year 2008. NERRS is a network 
of reserves across the country that are operated as a cooperative 
federal-state partnership.
  Currently, there are 25 reserves in 22 States. They provide an 
important opportunity for long-term research and education in these 
ecosystems. Additional funds will help strengthen this nationwide 
program which has not received increased funding commensurate with the 
addition of new reserves.
  I would like to address a very serious problem facing the Coastal 
Zone Management Program that we have tried to rectify in this bill. The 
Administrative Grant program, section 306, serves as the base funding 
mechanism for the States' coastal zone management programs. The amount 
of funding each State receives is determined by a formula that takes 
into account both the length of the coastline and the population of 
each State.
  However, since 1992, the Appropriations Committee has imposed a two 
million dollar cap per State on Administrative Grants. This was an 
attempt to ensure equitable allocation to all the participating states. 
Over the past eight years appropriations for Administrative Grants have 
increased by $19 million, yet the $2 million cap has remained. The 
result has been an inequitable distribution of these new funds. By 
fiscal year 2000, 13 States had reached this arbitrary $2 million cap. 
These 13 States account for 83 percent of our Nation's coastline and 76 
percent of our coastal population.
  It is not equitable to have the 13 States with the largest coastlines 
and populations stuck at a two million dollar cap, despite major 
overall funding increases. While smaller States have enjoyed additional 
programmatic success due to an influx of funding, some of the larger 
States have stagnated.
  In an attempt to reassure members of the Appropriations Committee 
that a fair distribution of funds can occur without this hard cap in 
place, I have worked with Senator Hollings to develop language that has 
been included in this bill that directs the Secretary of Commerce to 
ensure that equitable increases or decreases between funding years for 
each State. It further requires that States should not experience a 
decrease in base program funds in any year when the overall 
appropriations increase.
  I would like to thank Senator Hollings for his assistance in 
resolving this matter and his commitment over the years to ensuring 
that the States are treated fairly.
  The Coastal Zone Management Program enjoys wide support among all of 
the coastal states due to its history of success. This support has been 
clearly demonstrated by the many members of the Commerce Committee who 
have worked with me to strengthen this program over the past several 
years.
  I would like to thank Senator Kerry, the Ranking Democrat of the 
Oceans and Fisheries Subcommittee for his hard work and support of this 
bill. I would also like to express my appreciation to Senator McCain, 
the Chairman of the Commerce Committee, and Senator Hollings, the 
Ranking Democrat of the Committee, for their support of this measure 
and for their willingness to discharge this bill out of the committee 
so that we may begin working with our colleagues in the House of 
Representatives to enact this critical piece of legislation.
  This is a solid, reasonable, and a realistic bill that enjoys 
bipartisan support on the Commerce Committee. It is time that we now 
turn to legislation reauthorizing a program with a long track record of 
preserving our coastal environment while allowing sensible development.
  I am pleased to support this legislation that will provide the States 
with the necessary funding and framework to meet the challenges facing 
our coastal communities in the 21st century. I urge my colleagues to 
support it.

                          ____________________