[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5237-5246]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CAMPBELL (by request):
  S. 2232. A bill to amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 to 
revise the fee cap on National Indian Gaming Commission funding and 
make certain technical amendments; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, at the request of the administration, 
today I am introducing the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act Amendments of 
2004 to amend and update the act.
  These amendments are proposed by the administration to update the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act by: clarifying how vacancies in the 
National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) are filled; expanding the 
NIGC's regulatory responsibilities; revising the NIGC statutory rates 
of pay to correspond with other current Federal rates of pay; and 
expanding the NIGC's reporting requirements to Congress.
  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. 2232

       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 ``Indian Gaming Regulatory Act 
     Amendments of 2004''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       Section 4 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2703) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), 
     (8), and (10), as paragraphs (6), (7), (8), (3), (4), (5), 
     and (11), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:
       ``(10) Regulated person or entity.--The term `regulated 
     person or entity' means--
       ``(A) an Indian tribe;
       ``(B) a tribal operator of an Indian gaming operation;
       ``(C) a management contractor engaged in Indian gaming;
       ``(D) any person that is associated with--
       ``(i) a gaming operation, or any part of a gaming 
     operation, of an Indian tribe; or
       ``(ii) a gaming-related contractor of an Indian tribe; and
       ``(E) any person that--
       ``(i) agrees, by contract or otherwise, to provide a tribal 
     gaming operation with supplies, a service, or a concession 
     with an estimated value in excess of $25,000 annually (not 
     including a contract for a legal or accounting service, 
     commercial banking service, or public utility service); or
       ``(ii) requests a suitability determination by the 
     Commission, or by an Indian tribe or State, as part of an 
     effort--

       ``(I) to acquire a direct financial interest in, or 
     management responsibility for, a management contract for 
     operation of a tribal gaming facility; or
       ``(II) to participate in a gaming-related activity that 
     requires a licensing decision by an Indian tribe or State.''.

     SEC. 3. NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION.

       Section 5 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2704) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``(A)''; and
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B);
       (2) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Vacancies.--
       ``(1) In general.--A vacancy on the Commission shall be 
     filled in the same manner as the original appointment.
       ``(2) Service after expiration of term.--A member may serve 
     after the expiration of the member's term at the pleasure of 
     the officer of the United States who appointed the member.''; 
     and
       (3) in the second sentence of subsection (e), by striking 
     ``during meetings of the Commission in the absence of the 
     Chairman'' and inserting ``in the absence of, or during any 
     period of disability of, the Chairman''.

     SEC. 4. POWERS OF CHAIRMAN.

       Section 6 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2705) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``, on behalf of the Commission,'';
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) to issue to a regulated person or entity an order 
     that--
       ``(A) requires an accounting and disgorgement, with 
     interest;
       ``(B) reprimands or censures; or
       ``(C) places a limitation on a gaming activity or gaming 
     function.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Delegation.--The Chairman may delegate to any member 
     of the Commission, on such terms and conditions as the 
     Chairman may determine, any power of the Chairman under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(d) Manner of Exercise.--Authority under subsection (a) 
     shall be exercised in a manner that is consistent with--
       ``(1) due process of law;
       ``(2) this Act; and
       ``(3) the rules, findings, and determinations made by the 
     Commission in accordance with applicable law.''.

     SEC. 5. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

       Section 7 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2706) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(5), by striking ``permanent'' and 
     inserting ``final'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraphs (1), (2), and (4), by inserting ``and 
     class III gaming'' after ``class II gaming'';
       (B) in paragraph (9), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) in paragraph (10), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) may, in case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey any 
     subpoena issued to, any person, request the Attorney General 
     to invoke the jurisdiction of any court of the United States, 
     within the geographical jurisdiction of which a person to 
     whom the subpoena was directed is an inhabitant, is 
     domiciled, is organized, has appointed an agent for service 
     of process, transacts business, or is found, to compel 
     compliance with the subpoena to require the attendance and 
     testimony of witnesses and the production of records; and
       ``(12) subject to subsection (c), may accept gifts on 
     behalf of the Commission.''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Gifts.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Commission shall not accept a gift--
       ``(A) that attaches a condition that is inconsistent with 
     any applicable law (including a regulation); or
       ``(B) that is conditioned on, or will require, the 
     expenditure of appropriated funds that are not available to 
     the Commission.
       ``(2) Regulations.--The Commission shall promulgate 
     regulations specifying the criteria to be used to determine 
     whether the acceptance of a gift would--
       ``(A) adversely affect the ability of the Commission or any 
     employee of the Commission to carry out the duties of the 
     Commission in a fair and objective manner; or
       ``(B) compromise the integrity or the appearance of the 
     integrity of any official involved in a program of the 
     Commission.
       ``(d) Regulatory Plan.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Commission shall develop a 
     nonbinding regulatory plan for use in carrying out activities 
     of the Commission.
       ``(2) Treatment.--In developing the regulatory plan, the 
     Commission shall not be bound by chapter 6 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       ``(3) Contents.--The regulatory plan shall include--
       ``(A) a comprehensive mission statement describing the 
     major functions and operations of the Commission;
       ``(B) a description of the goals and objectives of the 
     Commission;
       ``(C) a description of the general means by which those 
     goals and objectives are to be achieved, including a 
     description of the operational processes, skills, and 
     technology and the human resources, capital, information, and 
     other resources required to achieve those goals and 
     objectives;
       ``(D) a performance plan for achievement of those goals and 
     objectives, including provision for a report on the actual 
     performance of the Commission as measured against the goals 
     and objectives;
       ``(E) an identification of the key factors that are 
     external to, or beyond the control of, the Commission that 
     could significantly affect the achievement of those goals and 
     objectives; and
       ``(F) a description of the program evaluations used in 
     establishing or revising those goals and objectives, 
     including a schedule for future program evaluations.
       ``(4) Duration.--The regulatory plan shall cover a period 
     of not less than 5 fiscal years, beginning with the fiscal 
     year in which the plan is developed.
       ``(5) Revision.--The regulatory plan shall be revised 
     biennially.''.

     SEC. 6. COMMISSION STAFFING.

       Section 8 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2707) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``basic pay payable for 
     GS-18 of the General Schedule

[[Page 5238]]

     under section 5332 of title 5'' and inserting ``pay payable 
     for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of 
     title 5, United States Code, as adjusted under section 5318 
     of that title'';
       (2) in the second sentence of subsection (b), by striking 
     ``basic pay payable for GS-17 of the General Schedule under 
     section 5332 of that title'' and inserting ``pay payable for 
     level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of 
     title 5, United States Code, as adjusted under section 5318 
     of that title''; and
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``basic pay payable for 
     GS-18 of the General Schedule'' and inserting ``pay payable 
     for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of 
     title 5, United States Code, as adjusted under section 5318 
     of that title''.

     SEC. 7. TRIBAL GAMING ORDINANCES.

       Section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2710) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(2)(F)(i)--
       (A) by inserting ``tribal gaming commissioners, key tribal 
     gaming commission employees, and'' after ``conducted on'';
       (B) by inserting ``primary management officials and key 
     employees'' after ``oversight of''; and
       (C) by striking ``such officials and their management''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (d)(9), by striking ``the provisions of 
     subsections (b), (c), (d), (f), (g), and (h) of''.

     SEC. 8. MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS.

       Section 12(a)(1) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 
     U.S.C. 2711(a)(1)) is amended by inserting ``or a class III 
     gaming activity that the Indian tribe may engage in under 
     section 11(d)'' after ``section 11(b)(1)''.

     SEC. 9. CIVIL PENALTIES.

       Section 14 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2713) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``provide such tribal operator or management 
     contractor'' in subsection (a)(3) and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 14. CIVIL PENALTIES.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Levy and collection.--Subject to such regulations as 
     the Commission may promulgate, the Chairman shall have 
     authority to--
       ``(A) levy and collect appropriate civil fines, not to 
     exceed $25,000 per violation, per day;
       ``(B) issue orders requiring accounting and disgorgement, 
     including interest; and
       ``(C) issue orders of reprimand, censure, or the placement 
     of limitations on gaming activities and functions of any 
     regulated person or entity for any violation of any provision 
     of this Act, Commission regulations, or tribal regulations, 
     ordinances, or resolutions approved under section 11 or 13.
       ``(2) Appeal.--The Commission shall by regulation provide 
     an opportunity for an appeal and hearing before the 
     Commission of an action taken under paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Complaint.--If the Commission has reason to believe 
     that a regulated person or entity is engaged in activities 
     regulated by this Act (including regulations promulgated 
     under this Act), or by tribal regulations, ordinances, or 
     resolutions approved under section 11 or 13, that may result 
     in the imposition of a fine under subsection (a)(1), the 
     permanent closure of a game, or the modification or 
     termination of a management contract, the Commission shall 
     provide the regulated person or entity.'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``game'' and inserting 
     ``gaming operation, or any part of a gaming operation,''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in the first sentence, by striking ``permanent'' and 
     inserting ``final''; and
       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``order a 
     permanent closure of the gaming operation'' and inserting 
     ``make final the order of closure''; and
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``permanent closure'' 
     and inserting ``closure, accounting, disgorgement, reprimand, 
     or censure or placement of a limitation on a gaming activity 
     or function''.

     SEC. 10. SUBPOENA AND DEPOSITION AUTHORITY.

       Section 16 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
     2715) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Judicial Enforcement.--On application of the Attorney 
     General, a district court of the United States shall have 
     jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus, injunction, or 
     order commanding any person to comply with this Act.'';
       (2) by redesignating subsections (d), (e), and (f) as 
     subsections (e), (f), and (g), respectively, and inserting 
     after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Failure To Obey Subpoena.--
       ``(1) In general.--In case of a failure to obey a subpoena 
     issued by the Commission or the Chairman and on request of 
     the Commission or Chairman, the Attorney General may apply to 
     the United States District Court for the District of Columbia 
     or any United States district court within the geographical 
     jurisdiction of which a person to whom the subpoena was 
     directed is an inhabitant, is domiciled, is organized, has 
     appointed an agent for service of process, transacts business 
     or is found, to compel compliance with the subpoena.
       ``(2) Remedies.--On application under paragraph (1), the 
     court shall have jurisdiction to--
       ``(A) issue a writ commanding the person to comply with the 
     subpoena; or
       ``(B) punish a failure to obey the writ as a contempt of 
     court.
       ``(3) Process.--Process to a person in any proceeding under 
     this subsection may be served wherever the person may be 
     found in the United States or as otherwise authorized by law 
     or by rule or order of the court.''.

     SEC. 11. COMMISSION FUNDING.

       Section 18(a)(2) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 
     U.S.C. 2717(a)(2)) is amended by striking subparagraph (B) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(B) Limitation.--The total amount of all fees imposed 
     during any fiscal year under the schedule established under 
     paragraph (1) shall not exceed 0.080 percent of the gaming 
     revenues of all gaming operations subject to regulation by 
     the Commission.''.

     SEC. 12. PRESERVATION OF EXISTING STATUS.

       Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this Act 
     expands, limits, or otherwise affects any immunity that an 
     Indian tribe may have under applicable law.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself and Mr. Carper):
  S. 2233. A bill to amend the Environmental Research, Development, and 
Demonstration Authorization Act of 1979 to establish in the 
Environmental Protection Agency the position of Deputy Administrator 
for Science and Technology; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.
  Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
with my friend and colleague, Senator Carper, which will strengthen the 
use of science at the Environmental Protection Agency. By improving 
science at the Agency, we will be improving the framework of our 
regulatory decisions. It is important that these regulations be 
effective, not onerous and inefficient. To make government regulations 
efficient, they must be based on a solid foundation of scientific 
understanding and data.
  In 2000, the Nation Research Council released a report, 
``Strengthening Science at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 
Research Management and Peer Review Practices'' which outlined current 
practices at the EPA and made recommendations for improving science 
within the agency. The bill we are introducing today, the 
``Environmental Research Enhancement Act,'' builds on the NRC report.
  When the Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1970 by 
President Nixon, its mission was set to protect human health and 
safeguard the environment. In the 1960s, it had become increasingly 
clear that ``we needed to know more about the total environment--land, 
water, and air.'' The EPA was part of President Nixon's 
reorganizational efforts to effectively ensure the protection, 
development and enhancement of the total environment.
  For the EPA to reach this mission, establishing rules and priorities 
for clean land, air and water require a fundamental understanding of 
the science behind the real and potential threats to public health and 
the environment. Unfortunately, many institutions, citizens and groups 
believe that science has not always played a significant role in the 
decision-making process at the EPA.
  In NRC's 2002 report, it was concluded that, while the use of sound 
science is one of the Environmental Protection Agency's goals, the EPA 
needs to change its current structure to allow science to play a more 
significant role in decisions made by the Administrator.
  The legislation we are introducing today looks to address those 
shortcomings at the EPA by implementing portions of the report that 
require congressional authorization.
  Under our bill, a new position, Deputy Administrator for Science and 
Technology will be established at the EPA. This individual will oversee 
the Office of Research and Development; the Environmental Information 
Agency; the Science Advisory board; the Science Policy Council; and the 
scientific and technical activities in the regulatory program at the 
EPA. This new position is equal in rank to the current Deputy 
Administrator and would report directly to the Administrator. The new 
Deputy would be responsible for coordinating scientific research and 
application between the scientific and regulatory arms of the

[[Page 5239]]

Agency. This will ensure that sound science is the basis for regulatory 
decisions. The new Deputy's focus on science could also change how 
environmental decisions are made.
  Assistant Administrator for Research and Development, currently the 
top science job at the EPA, will be appointed for 6 years versus the 
current 4 years political appointment. Historically, this position is 
recognized to be one of the EPA's weakest and most transient 
administrator positions according to NRC's report, even though in my 
view, the position addresses some of the Agency's more important 
topics. By lengthening the term of this Assistant Administrator 
position and removing it from the realm of politics, I believe there 
will be more continuity in the scientific work of the Agency across 
administrations and allow the Assistant Administrator to focus on 
science conducted at the Agency.
  In 1997, we learned the problems that can arise when sound science is 
not used in making regulatory decisions. Following EPA's ozone and 
particulate matter regulations there was great uncertainty on the 
scientific side.
  When intitally releasing the Ozone/PM regulations, the EPA greatly 
over estimated the impacts for both ozone and PM, and they had to 
publicly change their figures later on. Additionally, they selectively 
applied some study results while ignoring others in their calculations. 
For example, the majority of the health benefits for ozone are based on 
one PM study by a Dr. Moogarkar, even though the Agency ignored the PM 
results of that study because it contradicted their position on PM.
  The legislation that Senator Carper and I are introducing will ensure 
that science no longer takes a ``back seat'' at the Environmental 
Protection Agency in terms of policy making. I call on my colleagues to 
join us in cosponsoring this bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2233

       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 ``Environmental Research 
     Enhancement Act''.

     SEC. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY RESEARCH ACTIVITIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 6 of the Environmental Research, 
     Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1979 (42 
     U.S.C. 4361c) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Deputy Administrator for Science and Technology.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the 
     Environmental Protection Agency (referred to in this section 
     as the `Agency') the position of Deputy Administrator for 
     Science and Technology.
       ``(2) Appointment.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Deputy Administrator for Science and 
     Technology shall be appointed by the President, by and with 
     the advice and consent of the Senate.
       ``(B) Consideration of recommendations.--In making an 
     appointment under subparagraph (A), the President shall 
     consider recommendations submitted by--
       ``(i) the National Academy of Sciences;
       ``(ii) the National Academy of Engineering; and
       ``(iii) the Science Advisory Board established by section 8 
     of the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration 
     Authorization Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365).
       ``(3) Responsibilities.--
       ``(A) Oversight.--The Deputy Administrator for Science and 
     Technology shall coordinate and oversee--
       ``(i) the Office of Research and Development of the Agency 
     (referred to in this section as the `Office');
       ``(ii) the Office of Environmental Information of the 
     Agency;
       ``(iii) the Science Advisory Board;
       ``(iv) the Science Policy Council of the Agency; and
       ``(v) scientific and technical activities in the regulatory 
     program and regional offices of the Agency.
       ``(B) Other responsibilities.--The Deputy Administrator for 
     Science and Technology shall--
       ``(i) ensure that the most important scientific issues 
     facing the Agency are identified and defined, including those 
     issues embedded in major policy or regulatory proposals;
       ``(ii) develop and oversee an Agency-wide strategy to 
     acquire and disseminate necessary scientific information 
     through intramural efforts or through extramural programs 
     involving academia, other government agencies, and the 
     private sector in the United States and in foreign countries;
       ``(iii) ensure that the complex scientific outreach and 
     communication needs of the Agency are met, including the 
     needs--

       ``(I) to reach throughout the Agency for credible science 
     in support of regulatory office, regional office, and Agency-
     wide policy deliberations; and
       ``(II) to reach out to the broader United States and 
     international scientific community for scientific knowledge 
     that is relevant to Agency policy or regulatory issues;

       ``(iv) coordinate and oversee scientific quality-assurance 
     and peer-review activities throughout the Agency, including 
     activities in support of the regulatory and regional offices;
       ``(v) develop processes to ensure that appropriate 
     scientific information is used in decisionmaking at all 
     levels in the Agency; and
       ``(vi) ensure, and certify to the Administrator of the 
     Agency, that the scientific and technical information used in 
     each Agency regulatory decision and policy is--

       ``(I) valid;
       ``(II) appropriately characterized in terms of scientific 
     uncertainty and cross-media issues; and
       ``(III) appropriately applied.

       ``(f) Assistant Administrator for Research and 
     Development.--
       ``(1) Term of appointment.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the Assistant Administrator for Research 
     and Development of the Agency shall be appointed for a term 
     of 6 years.
       ``(2) Applicability.--Paragraph (1) applies to each 
     appointment that is made on or after the date of enactment of 
     this subsection.
       ``(g) Senior Research Appointments in Office of Research 
     and Development Laboratories.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--The head of the Office, in 
     consultation with the Science Advisory Board and the Board of 
     Scientific Counselors of the Office, shall establish a 
     program to recruit and appoint to the laboratories of the 
     Office senior researchers who have made distinguished 
     achievements in environmental research.
       ``(2) Awards.--
       ``(A) In general.--The head of the Office shall make awards 
     to the senior researchers appointed under paragraph (1)--
       ``(i) to support research in areas that are rapidly 
     advancing and are related to the mission of the Agency; and
       ``(ii) to train junior researchers who demonstrate 
     exceptional promise to conduct research in such areas.
       ``(B) Selection procedures.--The head of the Office shall 
     establish procedures for the selection of the recipients of 
     awards under this paragraph, including procedures for 
     consultation with the Science Advisory Board and the Board of 
     Scientific Counselors of the Office.
       ``(C) Duration of awards.--Awards under this paragraph 
     shall be made for a 5-year period and may be renewed.
       ``(3) Placement of researchers.--Each laboratory of the 
     Office shall have not fewer than 1 senior researcher 
     appointed under the program established under paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out this subsection.
       ``(h) Other Activities of Office of Research and 
     Development.--
       ``(1) Activities of the office.--The Office shall--
       ``(A) make a concerted effort to give research managers of 
     the Office a high degree of flexibility and accountability, 
     including empowering the research managers to make decisions 
     at the lowest appropriate management level consistent with 
     the policy of the Agency and the strategic goals and budget 
     priorities of the Office;
       ``(B) maintain, to the maximum extent practicable, an even 
     balance between core research and problem-driven research;
       ``(C) develop and implement a structured strategy for 
     encouraging, and acquiring and applying the results of, 
     research conducted or sponsored by other Federal and State 
     agencies, universities, and industry, both in the United 
     States and in foreign countries; and
       ``(D) substantially improve the documentation and 
     transparency of the decisionmaking processes of the Office 
     for--
       ``(i) establishing research and technical-assistance 
     priorities;
       ``(ii) making intramural and extramural assignments; and
       ``(iii) allocating funds.
       ``(2) Activities of the administrator.--The Administrator 
     of the Agency shall--
       ``(A) substantially increase the efforts of the Agency--
       ``(i) to disseminate actively the research products and 
     ongoing projects of the Office;
       ``(ii) to explain the significance of the research products 
     and projects; and
       ``(iii) to assist other persons and entities inside and 
     outside the Agency in applying the results of the research 
     products and projects;

[[Page 5240]]

       ``(B)(i) direct the Deputy Administrator for Science and 
     Technology to expand the science inventory of the Agency by 
     conducting, documenting, and publishing a more comprehensive 
     and detailed inventory of all scientific activities conducted 
     by Agency units outside the Office, which inventory should 
     include information such as--
       ``(I) project goals, milestones, and schedules;
       ``(II) principal investigators and project managers; and
       ``(III) allocations of staff and financial resources; and
       ``(ii) use the results of the inventory to ensure that 
     activities described in clause (i) are properly coordinated 
     through the Agency-wide science planning and budgeting 
     process and are appropriately peer reviewed; and
       ``(C) change the peer-review policy of the Agency to more 
     strictly separate the management of the development of a work 
     product from the management of the peer review of that work 
     product, thereby ensuring greater independence of peer 
     reviews from the control of program managers, or the 
     potential appearance of control by program managers, 
     throughout the Agency.''.
       (b) Deputy Administrator for Policy and Management.--
       (1) In general.--The position of Deputy Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency is redesignated as the 
     position of ``Deputy Administrator for Policy and Management 
     of the Environmental Protection Agency''.
       (2) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 
     document, paper, or other record of the United States to the 
     Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
     shall be deemed to be a reference to the Deputy Administrator 
     for Policy and Management of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency.
       (c) Executive Schedule Level III.--Section 5314 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating 
     to the Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency and inserting the following:
       ``Deputy Administrator for Policy and Management of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency.
       ``Deputy Administrator for Science and Technology of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DASCHLE (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Reed, Mr. Feingold, 
        Mr. Kohl, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Graham of Florida, Mr. 
        Reid, and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 2234. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
ensure that prescription drug card sponsors pass along discounts to 
beneficiaries under the medicare prescription drug discount card and 
transitional assistance program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the Medicare Prescription Drug, 
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 created a temporary drug 
discount card program. We expect that program to go into effect this 
summer. Under the new law, it is the only prescription drug assistance 
seniors will see until 2006. And it isn't much. This program has a lot 
of problems and I am very skeptical that it will provide meaningful 
assistance to most beneficiaries.
  Today, the administration announced which private companies have been 
selected to receive beneficiary enrollment fees and provide the cards 
to beneficiaries. The applicants included big pharmaceutical companies, 
pharmaceutical benefit managers, and HMOs. And the list of approved 
companies is a who's who of the insurance industry.
  One of the most glaring problems with the program is that the 
Medicare legislation fails to ensure that these private companies pass 
along the discounts they negotiate to beneficiaries. Today, I am 
introducing legislation to remedy that failure. My bill would require 
card sponsors to pass at least 90 percent of the discounts along to 
beneficiaries. It seems like common sense, but, true to form, the 
Republican Medicare bill allows the private companies to keep the 
discounts as profits. And the administration's regulations only require 
that they pass along a ``share'' of the discounts they negotiate. Well, 
I think that's giving them too much leeway.
  The administration is promising seniors discounts in order to 
convince them to pay private companies a $30 fee. My bill would ensure 
that these private companies pass the discounts along to those seniors. 
It's only fair. The sponsors will still have plenty of room for 
benefitting from participating in the program--they get the $30 
enrollment fee and they will be able to retain up to 10 percent of the 
negotiated price concessions.
  Despite all the hoopla, the cards themselves are nothing new. Some 
low-income beneficiaries will see $600 in assistance on their cards, 
and that is real help. Unfortunately, the process for gaining access to 
that money is so cumbersome, I worry that many will not get it. And I 
have serious doubts about whether the cards will add any other 
meaningful assistance. The General Accounting Office has found that 
similar cards now available on the market offer discounts on average of 
less than 10 percent--that's about what seniors could save by 
comparison shopping at local pharmacies.
  Worse, under the Medicare drug program, seniors will only be able to 
use one Medicare-endorsed card. Before the program, people could use as 
many cards as they wanted and compare discounts. And the real kicker is 
that once seniors pay a fee to participate, they're locked into that 
card for a year. But the card sponsor isn't locked into anything. It 
can change everything whenever it wants--even the amount of the 
discount or whether a discount is offered on a particular drug.
  And here's the worst part, this drug card program may already be 
harming all American drug consumers. As the Wall Street Journal noted 
just yesterday, recent drug price increases are eroding even the meager 
savings the administration predicts. What's more, all Americans are 
already paying higher drug prices. According to the Wall Street 
Journal, since the Bush administration proposed a Medicare drug card in 
2001, the prices of many drugs the elderly use have ``surged.'' For 
example, the article notes that since that time, the price of Lescol, a 
cholesterol drug, has increased by more than a third. Similarly, the 
price for Celebrex, a popular drug for arthritis pain, has risen 23 
percent since the administration proposed the cards.
  The administration is claiming the discount cards will result in 
beneficiary savings of between 10 and 25 percent. But the 
pharmaceutical industry's price hikes negate what little savings the 
administration optimistically predicts. Unfortunately, the discount 
cards are just one example of the new law's failure to address drug 
prices. The Boston University School of Public Health recently found 
that the new Medicare law could lead to an additional $139 billion in 
profits for the drug companies. The new law actually prohibits Medicare 
from using its negotiating power to obtain lower drug prices for 
seniors. And the reimportation provisions are meaningless. We know from 
experience that seniors can save much more than 10 to 25 percent by 
getting their drugs from Canada.
  As Families USA points out on its website, the drug cards actually 
create an incentive for the drug companies to raise their prices: 
``Neither the new law nor the regulations specify the `base prices' to 
which discounts will be applied. Any discount will be meaningless if 
the base price is undefined--especially if the base price continues to 
rise very substantially. It would be like a department store marking up 
prices on products so that it can later offer them `on sale' at 
tremendous `savings.'''
  The bill I am introducing addresses only one flaw in a program 
riddled with problems. I feel that it is a critical step. At the very 
least, we should ensure that if this program does offer some sort of 
price concession, that Medicare beneficiaries--not private companies 
like HMOs--are the ones to profit from the results.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record following my remarks.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2234

       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 ``Drug Discount Card 
     Improvement Act of 2004''.

[[Page 5241]]



     SEC. 2. ENSURING THAT PRESCRIPTION DRUG CARD SPONSORS PASS 
                   ALONG DISCOUNTS TO BENEFICIARIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-31(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-141(e)(1)(A)(ii)), as 
     added by section 101 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, 
     Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-
     173; 117 Stat. 2071), is amended by striking ``take into 
     account'' and inserting ``reflect at least 90 percent of 
     all''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section 
     101 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and 
     Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-173; 117 Stat. 
     2066).
      By Mr. HOLLINGS:
  S. 2235. A bill to rename the Department of Commerce as the 
Department of Trade and Commerce and transfer the Office of the United 
States Trade Representative into the Department, to consolidate and 
enhance statutory authority to protect American jobs from unfair 
international competition, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of 
an article I wrote for the Washington Post Outlook section be printed 
and that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2235

       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 ``Domestic Workforce 
     Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. COMMERCE DEPARTMENT RENAMED AS DEPARTMENT OF TRADE 
                   AND COMMERCE.

       (a) In General.--The Department of Commerce is hereby 
     redesignated the Department of Trade and Commerce, and the 
     Secretary of Commerce or any other official of the Department 
     of Commerce is hereby redesignated the Secretary or official, 
     as appropriate, of Trade and Commerce.
       (b) Reference to Department, Secretary, etc. of Commerce 
     Deemed Reference to Department, Secretary, etc. of Trade and 
     Commerce.--Any reference to the Department of Commerce, the 
     Secretary of Commerce, or any other official of the 
     Department of Commerce in any law, rule, regulation, 
     certificate, directive, instruction, or other official paper 
     in force on the effective date of this Act shall be deemed to 
     refer and apply to the Department of Trade and Commerce or 
     the Secretary of Trade and Commerce, respectively.

     SEC. 3. TRANSFER OF THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE 
                   REPRESENTATIVE TO WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                   COMMERCE AND TRADE.

       Section 141(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171(a)) 
     is amended by striking ``Executive Office of the President'' 
     and inserting ``Department of Trade and Commerce''.

     SEC. 4. TERMINATION OF DEFERRAL TO ELIMINATE TAX BENEFITS FOR 
                   OFFSHORE PRODUCTION.

       (a) General Rule.--Paragraph (1) of section 951(a) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to amounts included 
     in gross income of United States shareholders) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon in subparagraph 
     (A)(iii);
       (2) by striking ``959(a)(2).'' in subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting ``959(a)(2); and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end thereof the following:
       ``(C) the amount determined under section 956A with respect 
     to such shareholder for such year (but only to the extent not 
     excluded from gross income under section 959(a)(3)).''.
       (b) Amount of Inclusion.--Subpart F of part III of 
     subchapter N of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by inserting after section 956 the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 956A. EARNINGS OF CONTROLLED FOREIGN CORPORATIONS.

       ``(a) General Rule.--In the case of any controlled foreign 
     corporation, the amount determined under this section with 
     respect to any United States shareholder for any taxable year 
     is the lesser of--
       ``(1) the excess (if any) of--
       ``(A) such shareholder's pro rata share of the amount of 
     the controlled foreign corporation's assets for such taxable 
     year, over
       ``(B) the amount of earnings and profits described in 
     section 959(c)(1)(B) with respect to such shareholder, or
       ``(2) such shareholder's pro rata share of the applicable 
     earnings of such controlled foreign corporation determined 
     after the application of section 951(a)(1)(B).
       ``(b) Applicable Earnings.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `applicable earnings' means, with respect to any 
     controlled foreign corporation, the sum of--
       ``(1) the amount referred to in section 316(a)(1) to the 
     extent such amount was accumulated in taxable years beginning 
     after February 29, 2004, and
       ``(2) the amount referred to in section 316(a)(2),

     reduced by distributions made during the taxable year and 
     reduced by the earnings and profits described in section 
     959(c)(1) to the extent that the earnings and profits so 
     described were accumulated in taxable years beginning after 
     February 29, 2004.
       ``(c) Special Rule Where Corporation Ceases To Be 
     Controlled Foreign Corporation During Taxable Year-.--If any 
     foreign corporation ceases to be a controlled foreign 
     corporation during any taxable year--
       ``(1) the determination of any United States shareholder's 
     pro rata share shall be made on the basis of stock owned 
     (within the meaning of section 958(a)) by such shareholder on 
     the last day during the taxable year on which the foreign 
     corporation is a controlled foreign corporation,
       ``(2) the amount of such corporation's assets for such 
     taxable year shall be determined by only taking into account 
     quarters ending on or before such last day, and
       ``(3) in determining applicable earnings, the amount taken 
     into account by reason of being described in paragraph (2) of 
     section 316(a) shall be the portion of the amount so 
     described which is allocable (on a pro rata basis) to the 
     part of such year during which the corporation is a 
     controlled foreign corporation.
       ``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of 
     this section, including regulations to prevent the avoidance 
     of the provisions of this section through reorganizations or 
     otherwise.''.
       (c) Previously Taxed Income Rules.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 959 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exclusion from 
     gross income of previously taxed earnings and profits) is 
     amended by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1), by 
     adding ``or'' at the end of paragraph (2), and by inserting 
     after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) such amounts would, but for this subsection, be 
     included under section 951(a)(1)(C) in the gross income 
     of,''.
       (2) Allocation rules.--
       (A) Subsection (a) of section 959 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``paragraph (2)'' in the 
     last sentence and inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (3)''.
       (B) Section 959(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended--
       (i) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(A) amounts that would be included under subparagraph (B) 
     of section 951(a)(1) (determined without regard to this 
     section) shall be treated as attributable first to earnings 
     described in subsection (c)(2), and then to earnings 
     described in subsection (c)(3), and
       ``(B) amounts that would be included under subparagraph (C) 
     of section 951(a)(1) (determined without regard to this 
     section) shall be treated as attributable first to earnings 
     described in subsection (c)(2) to the extent the earnings so 
     described were accumulated in taxable years beginning after 
     February 29, 2004, and then to earnings described in 
     subsection (c)(3).''; and
       (ii) by striking ``section 951(a)(1)(B)'' in paragraph (2) 
     and inserting ``subparagraphs (B) and (C) of section 
     951(a)(1)''.
       (3) Conforming amendment.--Subsection (b) of section 989 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``section 951(a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``subparagraph (B) or 
     (C) of section 951(a)(1)''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years of foreign corporations 
     beginning after February 29, 2004, and to taxable years of 
     United States shareholders in which or with which such 
     taxable years of foreign corporations end.
       (e) Technical and Conforming Changes.--The Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall, within 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the 
     House of Representatives and to the Committee on Finance of 
     the Senate, a draft of any technical and conforming changes 
     in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that are necessary to 
     reflect throughout such Code the changes in the substantive 
     provisions of law made by this section.

     SEC. 5. DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTIONS FOR CERTAIN OFFSHORE 
                   ROYALTY PAYMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     ``SEC. 280I. CERTAIN OFFSHORE ROYALTY PAYMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--In the case of a corporation, no 
     deduction shall be allowed for the payment of a royalty to an 
     affiliated entity organized and operated outside the United 
     States in exchange for the use of rights to a copyrighted or 
     trademarked product if those rights were transferred by the 
     corporation or a related party to that entity.
       ``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the 
     payment of a royalty if the taxpayer establishes, to the 
     satisfaction of the Secretary, that--
       ``(1) the transfer of the rights to the entity was for a 
     sound business reason (other than

[[Page 5242]]

     the reduction of liability for tax under this chapter); and
       ``(2) the amounts paid or incurred for such royalty 
     payments are reasonable under the circumstances.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The part analysis for such part is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

``280I. Certain offshore royalty payments.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2003.

     SEC. 6. INCREASE IN AUTHORITY OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 
                   TO THWART USE OF TAX HAVENS BY CORPORATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter B of chapter 78 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 7625. AUTHORITY TO FRUSTRATE USE OF CORPORATE TAX 
                   HAVENS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized--
       ``(1) to deny any otherwise allowable deduction or credit 
     under chapter 1,
       ``(2) to recharacterize, reallocate, and resource income,
       ``(3) to recharacterize transactions, and
       ``(4) to disregard any transaction, trust, or other legal 
     entity,

     determined by the Secretary to be necessary to prevent the 
     use by a corporation of a tax haven to avoid liability for 
     tax under this chapter.
       ``(b) Tax Haven Defined.--In this section, the term `tax 
     haven' means any country that meets the tax haven criteria 
     established by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and 
     Development.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The subchapter analysis for 
     subchapter B of chapter 78 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by adding at the end the following:

``6725. Authority to frustrate use of corporate tax havens''.

     SEC. 7. ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR TRADE.

       (a) Position Established.--The Attorney General shall 
     appoint an Assistant Attorney General for Trade.
       (b) Duties.--The Assistant Attorney General for Trade 
     shall--
       (1) investigate anticompetitive conduct by foreign 
     companies that has an adverse impact on the economy of the 
     United States (including manufacturing, agriculture, and 
     employment) or the global competitiveness of United States 
     companies;
       (2) investigate violations of international trade 
     agreements to which the United States is a party that have an 
     adverse impact on the economy of the United States (including 
     manufacturing, agriculture, and employment) or the global 
     competitiveness of United States companies and take 
     appropriate action to seek redress or punishment for those 
     violations; and
       (3) investigate and initiate appropriate action against 
     other activities throughout the world that have an adverse 
     impact on the economy of the United States (including 
     manufacturing, agriculture, and employment) or the global 
     competitiveness of United States companies.
       (c) Authority Is in Addition to Other Authorities.--The 
     authority granted to the Assistant Attorney General for Trade 
     by this section is in addition to, and not in derogation or 
     in lieu of, any authority provided by law to any other 
     officer or agency of the United States charged with 
     enforcement of the trade laws of the United States or of 
     international agreements to which the United States is a 
     party.
       (d) Compensation.--Section 5315 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking ``(10)'' in the item relating to 
     Assistant Attorney General and inserting ``(11)''.

     SEC. 8. EMPLOYMENT OF ADDITIONAL CUSTOMS INSPECTORS FOR 
                   ILLEGAL TRANSSHIPMENTS OF TEXTILES.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security shall hire, train, and 
     deploy 1,000 customs agents in addition to the number of 
     customs agents otherwise authorized by law or otherwise 
     employed by the Department of Homeland Security for the 
     purpose of detecting and preventing illegal transshipments of 
     textiles to avoid textile import quotas and in violation of 
     trade agreements to which the United States is a party.

     SEC. 9. INCREASED DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                   CRITICAL GOODS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation 
     with the Secretary of Defense, the Director of the Central 
     Intelligence Agency, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, and the Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration shall develop a program to encourage 
     and support increased domestic production of goods and 
     products that are essential or critical to national security 
     in order to decrease the United States' dependence upon 
     imports of such goods and products.
       (b) Support Program.--The Secretary of Commerce shall 
     implement the program developed under subsection (a) to the 
     maximum extent feasible through existing programs, including 
     programs administered by the Small Business Administration. 
     The Secretary shall transmit to the Congress a report, within 
     18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, describing 
     the program and making such recommendations, including 
     legislative recommendations, as the Secretary deems necessary 
     for expanding the scope or improving the efficacy of the 
     program. The Secretary may submit the report in both 
     classified and redacted form.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out the program.

     SEC. 10. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
                   CERTAIN PROGRAMS.

       It is the sense of the Senate that the Congress should 
     appropriate the full amount authorized by law to carry out 
     the Regional Centers for the Transfer of Manufacturing 
     Technology program under section 25 of the National Institute 
     of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S. C. 278k) and the 
     Advanced Technology Program authorized by section 28 of that 
     Act (15 U.S. C. 278n).

     SEC. 11. TRANSFER OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION 
                   FUNCTIONS.

       (a) Abolishment of ITC.--Effective on the first day of the 
     seventh month beginning after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the United States International Trade Commission 
     established by section 330 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
     U.S.C. 1330) as in effect on the last day of the sixth month 
     beginning after the date of enactment of this Act is 
     abolished.
       (b) Transfer of Functions.--Except as otherwise provided in 
     this Act, all functions that on the last day of the sixth 
     month beginning after the date of enactment of this Act are 
     authorized to be performed by the United States International 
     Trade Commission are transferred to the Department of 
     Commerce effective on the first day of the seventh month 
     beginning after the date of enactment of this Act and shall 
     be performed by the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 
     Import Administration.
       (c) Determination of Certain Functions.--If necessary, the 
     Office of Management and Budget shall make any determination 
     of the functions that are transferred under this section.

     SEC. 12. INCIDENTAL TRANSFERS.

       The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall make such 
     determinations as may be necessary with regard to the 
     functions, offices, or portions thereof transferred by this 
     Act, and make such additional incidental dispositions of 
     personnel, assets, liabilities, grants, contracts, property, 
     records, and unexpended balances of appropriations, 
     authorizations, allocations, and other funds held, used, 
     arising from, available to, or to be made available in 
     connection with such functions, offices, or portions thereof, 
     as may be necessary to carry out this Act. The Director shall 
     provide for the termination of the affairs of all entities 
     terminated by this Act and, in consultation with the 
     Administrator, for such further measures and dispositions as 
     may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Act.

               [From the Washington Post, March 21, 2004]

               Protectionism Happens To Be Congress's Job

                        (By Ernest F. Hollings)

       Free trade is like world peace--you can't get there by 
     whining about it. You must be willing to fight for it. And 
     the entity to fight for free trade is the U.S. Congress.
       Instead, Congress--whose members are shouting ``fair 
     trade'' and ``level the playing field''--is the very group 
     tilting the playing field when it comes to trade.
       By piling items onto the cost of doing business here, 
     Congress has helped end the positive trade balance that the 
     United States ran right up until the early 1980s. Over the 
     past 40 years, the minimum wage went up, the Environmental 
     Protection Agency was established, and the Occupational 
     Safety and Health Administration was set up. Lawmakers added 
     the Equal Pay Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act 
     and the Employment Retirement Income Security Act. Then came 
     the sharp increase in payroll taxes for Social Security in 
     1983, measures requiring plant closing notice and parental 
     leave, and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Health costs 
     increased, too, making it $500 a car cheaper in health costs 
     alone for General Motors to make Pontiacs in Canada. All this 
     helped give us a trade deficit that hit a record $43.1 
     billion in January alone.
       Even if wages were equalized, it would still pay for U.S. 
     companies to move operations to places such as China, which 
     requires none of these aspects of America's high standard of 
     living. Recently, columnist George Will wrote: ``The export 
     of jobs frees U.S. workers for tasks where America has a 
     comparative advantage.'' But in global competition, what 
     matters is not the comparative advantage of our ability so 
     much as the comparative disadvantage of our living standard.
       To really level the playing field in trade would require 
     lowering our living standard, which is not going to happen. 
     We value our clean air and water, our safe factories and 
     machinery, and our rights and benefits. Both Republicans and 
     Democrats overwhelmingly support this living standard and 
     many are prepared to raise its. The only course possible, 
     then, is to protect the standard.
       To talk in these terms raises cries of ``protectionism.'' 
     But the business of government is protection. The oath of the 
     public servant

[[Page 5243]]

     is ``to preserve, protect and defend.'' We have the Army to 
     protect us from enemies without and the FBI to protect us 
     from enemies within. We have Medicare and Medicaid to protect 
     us from ill health, and Social Security to protect us from 
     poverty in old age. We have the Securities and Exchange 
     Commission to protect us from stock fraud; banking laws to 
     protect us from usurpers; truth in lending laws to protect us 
     from charlatans.
       When it comes to trade, however, multinational corporations 
     contend that we do not need to protect, but to educate and to 
     improve skills; productivity is the problem, they say. But 
     the United States is the most productive industrial nation in 
     the world, with skills galore. BMW is producing better-
     quality cars in South Carolina than in Munich. There are 
     other obstacles that need addressing. For 50 years we have 
     tried to penetrate the Japanese market, but have barely done 
     so. To sell textiles in Korea, U.S. firms must first obtain 
     permission from the private Korean textile industry. If you 
     want to sell in China, it's a lot easier if you produce in 
     China.
       ``But we will start a trade war,'' is the cry. Wake up! We 
     have been in a trade for more than 200 years. And it's the 
     United States that started it! Just after the colonies won 
     their freedom, the mother country suggested that the United 
     States trade what we produced best and, in exchange, Britain 
     would trade back with what it produced best--as economist 
     David Ricardo later described in this theory of ``comparative 
     advantage.'' Alexander Hamilton, in his famous ``Report on 
     Manufactures,'' told the Brits, in so many words, to bug off. 
     He said, we are not going to remain your colony shipping you 
     our natural resources--rice, cotton, indigo, timber, iron 
     or--and importing your manufactured products. We are going to 
     build our own manufacturing capacity.
       The second bill ever adopted by Congress, on July 4, 1789, 
     was a 50 percent tariff on numerous articles. This policy of 
     protectionism, endorsed by James Madison and Thomas 
     Jefferson, continued under President Lincoln when he launched 
     America's steel industry by refusing to import from England 
     the steel for the Transcontinental Railroad. President 
     Franklin Roosevelt protected agriculture, President 
     Eisenhower protected oil and President Kennedy protected 
     textiles. This economic and industrial giant, the United 
     States, was built on protectionism and, for more than a 
     century, financed it with tariffs. And it worked.
       The Washington mantra of ``retrain, retrain'' comes up 
     short. For example, Oneita Industries closed its T-shirt 
     plant in Andrews, SC, back in 1999. The plant had 487 
     employees averaging 47 years of age. Let's assume they were 
     ``retrained'' and became 487 skilled computer operators. Who 
     is going to hire a 47-year-old operator over a 21-year-old 
     operator? No one is going to take on the retirement and 
     health costs of the 47-year-old. Moreover, that computer job 
     probably just left for Bangalore, India.
       In global competition there is a clash between standards of 
     living. I supported free trade with Canada because we have 
     relatively the same standard of living. But I opposed free 
     trade with Mexico, and therefore voted against the North 
     American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), preferring to raise 
     the standards in Mexico, as Europe did with Portugal, Spain 
     and Greece before admitting them to Europe's common market. 
     To be eligible for a tree trade agreement you should first 
     have a free market, labor rights, ownership of property, 
     contract rights of appeal and a respected judiciary. Mexico 
     lacked these, and after NAFTA there was an immediate flow of 
     jobs out of the United States because of Mexico's lesser 
     standards. Australia, on the other hand, has labor rights, 
     environmental rights and an open market, so the trade 
     agreement reached with Australia this month should be 
     approved.
       We must engage in competitive trade. To eliminate a 
     barrier, raise a barrier. Then eliminate them both.
       Our trouble is that we have treated trade as aid. After 
     World War II, we were the only country with industry, and in 
     order to prosper we needed to spread prosperity. Through the 
     Marshall Plan, we sent money, equipment and expertise to 
     Europe and the Pacific Rim. And it worked. Capitalism 
     defeated communism in the Cold War. Our hope in crying ``free 
     trade'' was that markets would remain open for our exports. 
     But our cries went unheeded, and now our Nation's security is 
     in jeopardy.
       National security is like a three-legged stool. The first 
     leg--values--is solid. Our stand for freedom and democracy is 
     respected around the world. The second leg of military 
     strength is unquestioned. But the third leg, economic leg, is 
     fractured and needs repair. We are losing jobs faster than we 
     can create them. Some time ago the late Akio Morita, founder 
     of Sony Corp., was lecturing leaders of third-world 
     countries, admonishing them to develop their manufacturing 
     capacity to become nation states. Then, pointing at me in the 
     audience, he stated, ``That world power that loses its 
     manufacturing capacity will cease to be a world power.''
       What should we do? First, we need to stop financing the 
     elimination of jobs. Tax benefits for offshore production 
     must end. Royalty deductions allowed for offshore activities 
     must be eliminated, and tax havens for corporations must be 
     closed down.
       Next, we need an assistant attorney general to enforce our 
     trade laws and agreements. At present, enforcement is largely 
     left to an injured party. It can take years to jump over 
     legal hurdles. Then at the end, based on national security, 
     the president can refuse to implement a court order. Rather 
     than waste time and money, corporate America has moved 
     offshore.
       We need to organize government to produce and protect jobs, 
     rather than export them. The Commerce Department recently co-
     sponsored a New York seminar, part of which advised companies 
     on how to move jobs offshore. This aid for exporting jobs 
     must stop. The Department of Commerce should be reconstituted 
     as a Department of Trade and Commerce, with the secretary as 
     czar over the U.S. trade representative. The department's 
     International Trade Administration should determine not only 
     whether goods have been dumped on the U.S. market, but how 
     big the ``injury'' is to U.S. industry. The International 
     Trade Commission should be eliminated.
       While it is illegal to sell foreign-made goods below cost 
     in the U.S. market (a practice called dumping), we refuse to 
     enforce such violations. The Treasury Department reports $2 
     billion worth of illegal transshipments of textiles into the 
     United States each year. Customs agents charged with drug 
     enforcement and homeland security are hard-pressed to stop 
     these transshipments. We need at lead at 1,000 additional 
     Customs agents.
       It won't be easy. A culture of free trade has developed. 
     The big banks that make most of their money outside the 
     country, as well as the Business Roundtable, the Conference 
     Board, the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. 
     Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation (whose 
     members make bigger profits on imported articles) and the 
     editorial writers of newspapers that make most of their 
     profits from retail ads--all these descend on Washington 
     promoting ``free trade'' to members of Congress. Members 
     looking for contributions shout the loudest.
       Not just jobs, but also the middle class and the strength 
     of our very democracy are in jeopardy. As Lincoln said, ``The 
     dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy 
     present. . . . As our case is new, so we must think anew, and 
     act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall 
     save our country.''
       Today's dogma is the belief that protectionism will mean 
     trade war and economic stagnation. But we are already in a 
     trade war, one from which the president and the Congress are 
     AWOL.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 2237. A bill to amend chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, 
to authorize civil copyright enforcement by the Attorney General, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the advent of the digital age promises the 
efficient distribution of music, films, books, and software on the 
Internet, and an easily-accessed, unprecedented variety of content 
online. Unfortunately, to see this promise realized, we must overcome 
some of the challenges presented by digital content distribution. Today 
I am pleased that Senator Hatch is joining me in sponsoring the 
``Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation 
(PIRATE) Act of 2004,'' which will respond to one such challenge. It 
will bring the resources and expertise of the United States Attorneys' 
Offices to bear on wholesale copyright infringers.
  The very ease of duplication and distribution that is the hallmark of 
digital content has meant that piracy of that content is just as easy. 
The very real--and often realized--threat that creative works will 
simply be duplicated and distributed freely online has restricted, 
rather than enhanced, the amount and variety of creative works one can 
receive over the Internet. Part of combating piracy includes offering a 
legal alternative to it. Another important part is enforcing the rights 
of copyright owners. Senator Hatch and I have been working with 
artists, authors, and software developers to create an environment in 
which copyright is protected, so that we can all enjoy American 
creativity, and so that copyright owners can be paid for their work.
  For too long, Federal prosecutors have been hindered in their pursuit 
of pirates, by the fact that they were limited to bringing criminal 
charges with high burdens of proof. In the world of

[[Page 5244]]

copyright, a criminal charge is unusually difficult to prove because 
the defendant must have known that his conduct was illegal and he must 
have willfully engaged in the conduct anyway. For this reason 
prosecutors can rarely justify bringing criminal charges, and copyright 
owners have been left alone to fend for themselves, defending their 
rights only where they can afford to do so. In a world in which a 
computer and an Internet connection are all the tools you need to 
engage in massive piracy, this is an intolerable predicament.
  Some steps have already been taken. The Allen-Leahy Amendment to the 
Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill, on Combating Piracy of U.S. 
Intellectual Property in Foreign Countries, provided $2.5 million for 
the Department of State to assist foreign countries in combating piracy 
of U.S. copyright works. By providing equipment and training to law 
enforcement officers, it will help those countries that are not members 
of OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development) to 
enforce intellectual property protections.
  The PIRATE Act will give the Attorney General civil enforcement 
authority for copyright infringement. It also calls on the Justice 
Department to initiate training and pilot programs to ensure that 
Federal prosecutors across the country are aware of the many difficult 
technical and strategic problems posed by enforcing copyright law in 
the digital age.
  This new authority does not supplant either the criminal provisions 
of the Copyright Act, or the remedies available to the copyright owner 
in a private suit. Rather, it allows the government to bring its 
resources to bear on this immense problem, and to ensure that more 
creative works are made available online, that those works are more 
affordable, and that the people who work to bring them to us are paid 
for their efforts.
  The challenges presented by digital content are multifaceted, and no 
single response will resolve all of them. We must, and we will, offer a 
broad array of solutions that taken together will help ensure the 
protection of intellectual property, encourage the deployment of 
digital content, and allow technology to develop unimpeded. This bill 
is just one step in this process. I am working with colleagues, members 
of the private sector, and officials from the Executive Branch, to 
craft careful and effective responses to other such challenges in the 
intellectual property arenas.
  I hope that my colleagues support the ``Protecting Intellectual 
Rights Against Theft and Expropriation (PIRATE) Act of 2004,'' and I 
ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2237

       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 ``Protecting Intellectual 
     Rights Against Theft and Expropriation Act of 2004''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF CIVIL COPYRIGHT ENFORCEMENT BY 
                   ATTORNEY GENERAL.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 506 the following:

     ``Sec. 506a. Civil penalties for violations of section 506

       ``(a) In General.--The Attorney General may commence a 
     civil action in the appropriate United States district court 
     against any person who engages in conduct constituting an 
     offense under section 506. Upon proof of such conduct by a 
     preponderance of the evidence, such person shall be subject 
     to a civil penalty under section 504 which shall be in an 
     amount equal to the amount which would be awarded under 
     section 3663(a)(1)(B) of title 18 and restitution to the 
     copyright owner aggrieved by the conduct.
       ``(b) Other Remedies.--
       ``(1) In general.--Imposition of a civil penalty under this 
     section does not preclude any other criminal or civil 
     statutory, injunctive, common law or administrative remedy, 
     which is available by law to the United States or any other 
     person;
       ``(2) Offset.--Any restitution received by a copyright 
     owner as a result of a civil action brought under this 
     section shall be offset against any award of damages in a 
     subsequent copyright infringement civil action by that 
     copyright owner for the conduct that gave rise to the civil 
     action brought under this section.''.
       (b) Damages and Profits.--Section 504 of title 17, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in the first sentence--
       (i) by inserting ``, or the Attorney General in a civil 
     action,'' after ``The copyright owner''; and
       (ii) by striking ``him or her'' and inserting ``the 
     copyright owner''; and
       (B) in the second sentence by inserting ``, or the Attorney 
     General in a civil action,'' after ``the copyright owner''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, or the Attorney 
     General in a civil action,'' after ``the copyright owner''; 
     and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, or the Attorney 
     General in a civil action,'' after ``the copyright owner''.
       (c) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 506 
     the following:

``506a. Civil penalties for violation of section 506.''.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF FUNDING FOR TRAINING AND PILOT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Training and Pilot Program.--Not later than 180 days 
     after enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall 
     develop a program to ensure effective implementation and use 
     of the authority for civil enforcement of the copyright laws 
     by--
       (1) establishing training programs, including practical 
     training and written materials, for qualified personnel from 
     the Department of Justice and United States Attorneys Offices 
     to educate and inform such personnel about--
       (A) resource information on intellectual property and the 
     legal framework established both to protect and encourage 
     creative works as well as legitimate uses of information and 
     rights under the first amendment of the United States 
     Constitution;
       (B) the technological challenges to protecting digital 
     copyrighted works from online piracy;
       (C) guidance on and support for bringing copyright 
     enforcement actions against persons engaging in infringing 
     conduct, including model charging documents and related 
     litigation materials;
       (D) strategic issues in copyright enforcement actions, 
     including whether to proceed in a criminal or a civil action;
       (E) how to employ and leverage the expertise of technical 
     experts in computer forensics;
       (F) the collection and preservation of electronic data in a 
     forensically sound manner for use in court proceedings;
       (G) the role of the victim copyright owner in providing 
     relevant information for enforcement actions and in the 
     computation of damages; and
       (H) the appropriate use of injunctions, impoundment, 
     forfeiture, and related authorities in copyright law;
       (2) designating personnel from at least 4 United States 
     Attorneys Offices to participate in a pilot program designed 
     to implement the civil enforcement authority of the Attorney 
     General under section 506a of title 17, United States Code, 
     as added by this Act; and
       (3) reporting to Congress annually on--
       (A) the use of the civil enforcement authority of the 
     Attorney General under section 506a of title 17, United 
     States Code, as added by this Act; and
       (B) the progress made in implementing the training and 
     pilot programs described under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this 
     subsection.
       (b) Annual Report.--The report under subsection (a)(3) may 
     be included in the annual performance report of the 
     Department of Justice and shall include--
       (1) with respect to civil actions filed under section 506a 
     of title 17, United States Code, as added by this Act--
       (A) the number of investigative matters received by the 
     Department of Justice and United States Attorneys Offices;
       (B) the number of defendants involved in those matters;
       (C) the number of civil actions filed and the number of 
     defendants involved;
       (D) the number of civil actions resolved or terminated;
       (E) the number of defendants involved in those civil 
     actions;
       (F) the disposition of those civil actions, including 
     whether the civil actions were settled, dismissed, or 
     resolved after a trial;
       (G) the dollar value of any civil penalty imposed and the 
     amount remitted to any copyright owner; and
       (H) other information that the Attorney General may 
     consider relevant to inform Congress on the effective use of 
     the civil enforcement authority;
       (2) a description of the training program and the number of 
     personnel who participated in the program; and
       (3) the locations of the United States Attorneys Offices 
     designated to participate in the pilot program.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 to carry 
     out this section.


[[Page 5245]]

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to join Senator Leahy in sponsoring 
the Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation 
Act--the ``PIRATE Act''--a measure that will provide the Department of 
Justice with tools to combat the rampant copyright piracy facilitated 
by peer-to-peer file
sharing software.
  Let me underscore at the outset that our bill does not expand the 
scope of the existing powers of the Department of Justice to prosecute 
persons who infringe copyrights. Instead, our proposal will assist the 
Department in exercising existing enforcement powers through a civil 
enforcement mechanism. After considerable study, we have concluded that 
this is the most appropriate mechanism.
  Peer-to-peer file sharing software has created a dilemma for law-
enforcement agencies. Millions of otherwise law-abiding American 
citizens are using this software to create and redistribute infringing 
copies of popular music, movies, computer games and software.
  Some who copy these works do not fully understand the illegality, or 
perhaps the serious consequences, of their infringing activities. This 
group of filesharers should not be the focus of federal law-enforcement 
efforts. Quite frankly, the distributors of most filesharing software 
have failed to adequately educate the children and young people who use 
their software about its legal and illegal uses.
  A second group of filesharers consists of those who copy and 
redistribute copyrighted works even though they do know that doing so 
violates federal law. In many cases, these are college students or 
young people who think that they will not get caught. Many of these 
filesharers are engaging in acts that could now subject them to federal 
criminal prosecution for copyright piracy.
  It is critical that we bring the moral force of the government to 
bear against those who knowingly violate the federal copyrights 
enshrined in our Constitution. But many of us remain concerned that 
using criminal law enforcement remedies to act against these infringers 
could have an overly-harsh effect, perhaps, for example, putting 
thousands of otherwise law-abiding teenagers and college students in 
jail and branding them with the lifelong stigma of a felony criminal 
conviction.
  The bill I join Senator Leahy in sponsoring today will allow the 
Department of Justice to supplement its existing criminal-enforcement 
powers through the new civil-enforcement mechanism. As a result, the 
Department will be able to impose stiff penalties for violating 
copyrights, but can avoid criminal action when warranted.
  In advancing this measure, I must note that I view this civil-
enforcement authority as another tool, hopefully a transitional tool at 
that. In the long run, I believe that we must find better mechanisms to 
ensure that our most vulnerable citizens--our children--are not being 
constantly tempted to infringe the copyrights that have made America a 
world leader in the production of creative works.
  Only recently has America faced the specter of widespread copyright-
enforcement actions against individual users of copyrighted works. For 
nearly 200 years, copyright enforcement was rarely directed against the 
millions of ordinary American citizens who use and enjoy copyrighted 
works. Instead, creators and distributors of copyrighted content worked 
together to negotiate the complex licensing agreements and 
technological protections needed to distribute copyrighted works in 
ways that accommodated both the expectations of users and the 
copyrights of artists.
  But recently, some unscrupulous corporations may have exploited new 
technologies and discovered that the narrow scope of civil contributory 
liability for copyright infringement can be utilized so that ordinary 
consumers and children become, in effect, ``human shields'' against 
copyright owners and law enforcement agencies. Unscrupulous 
corporations could distribute to children and students a ``piracy 
machine'' designed to tempt them to engage in copyright piracy or 
pornography distribution.
  Unfortuantely, piracy and pornography could then become the 
cornerstones of a ``business model.'' At first, children and students 
would be tempted to infringe copyrights or redistribute pornography. 
Their illicit activities then generate huge advertising revenues for 
the architects of piracy. Those children and students then become 
``human shields'' against enforcement efforts that would disrupt the 
flow of those revenues. Later, large user-bases and the threat of more 
piracy would become levers to force American artists to enter licensing 
agreements in which they pay the architects of piracy to distribute and 
protect their works on the Internet.
  Federal enforcement action is surely warranted if such ``business 
models'' are driving the increasing ease of piracy on peer-to-peer 
filesharing networks. Such business models exploit children, cheat 
artists, and threaten the future development of commerce on the 
Internet.
  Indeed, our government recognizes that its enforcement powers are 
appropriate when protecting intellectual property and public safety. 
Recently, in a speech to the United States Chamber of Commerce, Deputy 
Attorney General James B. Comey, Jr. asserted that the Department of 
Justice should assist private enforcement of intellectual property 
rights if any of three criteria are met: (1) the level of piracy 
becomes particularly egregious; (2) public health and safety are put at 
risk; or (3) private civil remedies fail to adequately deter illegal 
conduct.
  In the case of peer-to-peer file-
sharing, all three criteria may be met. The level of piracy on these 
networks is not merely egregious, it is unprecedented. Public health 
and safety are also directly threatened by business models that tempt 
children toward piracy and pornography and then use them as ``human 
shields'' against law enforcement.
  Finally, the recording industry and other affected rights holders 
have tried--so far largely unsuccessfully--to use civil remedies to 
halt the operations of those who would profit by turning teenagers and 
college students into copyright pirates or pornography distributors.
  As a result, our creative industries' only remaining option to deter 
piracy is to bring enough civil enforcement actions against users of 
filesharing software. Tens of thousands of continuing civil enforcement 
actions might be needed to generate the necessary deterrence. I doubt 
that any nongovernmental organization has the resources or moral 
authority to pursue such a campaign.
  If enforcement actions against end-users were really the best or only 
way to enforce copyrights on the Internet, then civil enforcement 
authority would be necessary. But there may be other ways to combat 
this piracy at the root, not at the branch. I thus invite the 
Department of Justice and other federal law enforcement agencies to 
work with me, Senator Leahy and other members of the Judiciary 
Committee to determine how the enforcement powers of the federal 
government can best be deployed to solve the problems arising from 
piracy and pornography on peer-to-peer filesharing networks.
  I also understand that others may be developing proposals to increase 
criminal enforcement authority against piracy, and I hope to work with 
them on such proposals. Today, I stand with Senator Leahy to buttress 
the enforcement of copyrights by enabling the Department of Justice to 
proceed with a robust program of civil enforcement.
  For the reasons I have just delineated, I urge my colleagues to join 
us in supporting the Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and 
Expropriation Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER:
  S. 2240. A bill to improve seaport security; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, at the end of 2002, the Maritime 
Transportation Security Act became law.
  I was a member of the conference committee on that bill, and I think 
it was a good first step in improving security at our nation's ports.
  It had many good provisions, such as the creation of national and 
regional

[[Page 5246]]

maritime transportation/port security plans to be approved by the Coast 
Guard; better coordination of federal, state, local, and private 
enforcement agencies; and the establishment of a grant program for port 
authorities, waterfront facilities operators, and state and local 
agencies to provide security infrastructure improvements.
  The problem was that the bill had no guaranteed funding mechanism. As 
a result, we are underfunding port security. Since the passage of the 
Maritime Transportation Security Act, the Department of Homeland 
Security has released $517 million in port security grants. This is not 
enough. According to the Coast Guard, it is estimated that the ports 
directly need $1.4 billion this year and $6 billion over the next ten 
years. Yet, the Administration only requested $46 million in its fiscal 
year 2005 budget.
  Last year, I visited many of California's ports including Crescent 
City in the north down through Stockton to Los Angeles/Long Beach in 
the south. I have seen what the ports are confronting. They need more 
funding for homeland security.
  And, with over 40 percent of the nation's goods imported through 
California's ports, freight rail is extremely important to the nation's 
commerce. A terrorist attack at a California port would not only be 
tragic but would be devastating for our nation's economy.
  So, today, I am introducing the Senate version of a bill introduced 
by Representative Millender-McDonald. This legislation will provide 
more funding to the ports. Specifically, it will: create a Port 
Security Grant Program in the Department of Homeland Security; provide 
$800 million per year for five years in grant funding; and--this is 
very important to California's ports--allow the federal government to 
make multiyear grants to help finance larger projects similar to what 
is done with many of our airports for aviation security.
  I hope that the Senate will act on this bill. Now is not the time to 
slow down or delay our efforts to increase and improve transportation 
security. The job is not done, and it must be done.

                          ____________________