[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8243-8248]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BUNNING (for himself and Mr. Miller):
  S. 2376. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 
the scheduled restrictions in the child tax credit, marriage penalty 
relief, and 10 percent rate bracket, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Working 
Family Tax Relief Act of 2004. I would like to thank my colleague, 
Senator Miller, for his support of this important legislation. His 
leadership has laid the foundation of bipartisan support that this 
critical tax bill and working American families deserve.
  Tax relief has contributed to economic growth throughout our economy. 
We have successfully encouraged companies to create more jobs and 
Americans to save and spend more. The President's tax cuts and our 
votes here in the Senate helped to revive an economy that was sagging 
in 2000 and shocked by the tragedies of September 11, 2001.
  We put a plan in place in 2001 to help the American family to keep 
more of the money they work so hard to earn. In 2003, Congress saw fit 
to accelerate the effective date of some of this family tax relief in 
order to give these families this help as quickly as possible. As a 
result, every American family who paid any income taxes during 2003 saw 
a reduction in their taxes and they will enjoy those lower taxes for 
this year as well. However, if we do not act this year, America's 
working families will face a tax increase next year. We cannot allow 
this to happen.
  The lowest-income Americans have benefited dramatically from the new 
10 percent tax bracket. Today, thanks to this new bracket, working 
Americans are keeping more of their hard-earned paychecks. But if we do 
nothing, taxpayers with as little as $7,000 in taxable income could 
face a tax increase next year. My legislation proposes to keep the 
current 10 percent tax rate bracket in place rather than allowing it to 
shrink and increase taxes on the working families of America. This 
extension could bring relief to as many as 1.2 million people in 
Kentucky and millions of others throughout the country.
  And, if we do nothing, the child tax credit will be cut by 30 percent 
in 2005. We need to keep the $1,000 tax credit and not let it revert to 
the old $700 credit. There are over 350,000 taxpayers in Kentucky who 
need this tax relief and will benefit from this legislation. We can't 
ask millions of Americans to pay an extra $300 per child next year. 
Will you ask the families of this country, who have worked so hard to 
raise our entire economy up, to pay more in taxes simply because they 
have children? I know I won't, and I hope my colleagues won't either.
  The accelerated marriage penalty relief will also lapse after this 
year unless the Senate acts. I propose keeping the current tax 
deduction in place, which we increased to twice that of an individual 
taxpayer in 2003. Without this extension, married couples will see a 
cut in their standardized deduction--actually penalizing couples for 
being married. Over 465,000 Kentuckians benefits from this legislation. 
We need to keep this important tax relief intact.
  And finally we need to address an unintended consequence of the 
Alternative Minimum Tax. When the Senate passed the AMT, it was 
designed to ensure wealthier Americans paid at least some percentage of 
their income in taxes. Now that same AMT is hurting working families 
and middle-income America. In 2003, the Senate passed limited AMT 
relief that is now set to expire. This legislation will keep the 
current exemption levels of $40,250 for single and $58,000 for married 
taxpayers in place for 2005. If we fail to act, an additional $7,000 to 
$13,000 of middle-income taxpayers' income will be subject to this tax. 
We all know that the AMT is a serious issue and one that we must 
address--the limited relief contained in this bill is not a final 
solution to this large problem, but it will keep the problem from 
getting even worse.
  There are other important tax cuts that should be extended and there 
are other problems with the tax code that I would like to correct. But 
the four provisions addressed in this bill have to be addressed today 
not just to provide tax relief, but to prevent an immediate tax 
increase. We owe it to the working families and low-income Americans 
who rely on these tax cuts to act quickly and extend these four 
provisions--the 10 percent tax bracket, child tax credit, marriage 
penalty relief and AMT relief. Working American families and lower to 
middle-income America were hit hard with the economic downturn--that is 
why we passed these tax cuts in the first place. And now, just as these 
industrious Americans have started to find new jobs and spend a little 
more money to grow the economy, we cannot hold them back with a tax 
increase.
  And I can't stress this point enough. Many Americans--especially low 
and middle income families--will have their tax rates increased and 
face cuts in their deductions and credits unless we act. My bill is 
about extending the important tax breaks that we all agreed to in 2001 
and accelerated in 2003. We made a commitment to the American family in 
the midst of an economic downturn--offering them tax relief to help 
stimulate the economy. And now that these tax cuts are starting to 
work, we can't afford to take them back. We must stay the course and 
support our Nation's families as we move the American economy forward 
toward renewed prosperity.
  I know how tight government finances are likely to be this year. And 
as my colleagues know, I have always taken a hard look at spending 
proposals. But we built about $80 billion into the Senate-passed FY 
2005 Budget proposal for these tax provisions. And there are similar 
provisions in the House-approved budget. I am confident that we can 
secure the amount we will need for this proposal over the next few 
years.
  We find ourselves in a unique position--we must be proactive to 
protect the American family from an unjust tax increase. We need to 
take a stand for low and middle income America. This Bunning-Miller tax 
relief legislation will protect working Americans from what would be a 
devastating tax increase in 2005. I urge my colleagues to get behind 
this bipartisan legislation and support the Working Family Tax Relief 
Act of 2004.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. JEFFORDS (for himself and Mr. SARBANES):
  S. 2377. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to ensure that 
the District of Columbia and States are provided with a safe, lead-free 
supply of drinking water; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Lead-Free 
Drinking Water Act of 2004 with my colleague Senator Sarbanes. We are 
joined by our colleagues, Congresswoman Norton, Congressman Waxman, and 
others, who will be introducing the House companion bill today.
  I was horrified, as I imagine we all were, when it was first reported 
that lead levels in DC public water system was significantly higher 
than Federal guidelines, and had been so for at least two years. I 
asked myself the same thing thousands of DC residents were asking 
themselves--why weren't we told about this sooner. How much water did I 
drink? How much water did my children drink? What are the effects of 
lead in our blood stream? What are the long-term effects? What are we 
going to do about it?
  This is a pretty sad situation no matter where you live, but it is 
especially

[[Page 8244]]

upsetting when you live in the Capital of the free world. Clearly, 
mistakes were made and changes are needed--because if it can happen in 
Washington, DC or Boston, it can happen anywhere.
  The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which I am the 
ranking member, held a hearing on this issue last month, and we heard 
some pretty compelling testimony from DC residents, health experts, 
risk management professionals and government officials.
  But we are going to do more than just hold hearings; today we are 
introducing the Lead-Free Drinking Waste Act of 2004.
  Our bill will overhaul the Safe Drinking Water Act to strengthen the 
Federal rules governing lead testing and regulations in our public 
water systems to ensure that our most vulnerable citizens--infants, 
children, pregnant women, and new moms--are not harmed by lead in the 
drinking water.
  Specifically, the bill requires the EPA to re-evaluate the current 
regulatory structure to figure out if it really provides the level of 
public health protection required.
  The bill calls on the EPA to establish a maximum contaminant level 
for lead at the tap, and if that is not practical given the presence of 
lead inside home plumbing systems, the bill requires EPA to re-evaluate 
the current action level for lead to ensure that vulnerable populations 
such as infants, children, pregnant women, and nursing mothers receive 
adequate protection.
  I look forward to working with EPA on this evaluation to determine 
which approach is most feasible and which provides the greatest level 
of public health protection.
  EPA has three choices--keep current standard, an ``action level'' at 
15 parts per billion; lower the current action level below 15 parts per 
billion; or establish a ``maximum contaminant load.''
  For example, it is clear that a maximum contaminant level, which is 
measured at the water treatment plant, would do little to protect 
people from lead-contaminated drinking water at their faucets. Our bill 
requires that standards be measured at the top.
  It is also clear that a low lead action level measured at the tap 
could provide more protection than a high MCL measured anywhere in the 
system if there were extremely strong and effective public notification 
procedures in place.
  Public notice is the key to success of any lead regulation-parents 
say to me, ``If only I had known, I could have protected my family.'' 
It is our job to be sure the public notice system we have in place gets 
people the information they need when they need it.
  The bill will require that information such as the number of homes 
tested, the lead levels found, the areas of the community in which they 
were located, and the disproportionate adverse health effects of lead 
on infants, be made public immediately upon detection of lead.
  In addition, the bill requires that, as part of routine testing 
conducted, any residents whose homes test high for lead receive 
notification within 14 days, and appropriate medical referrals.
  Finally, we don't want the day of an exceedance to be the first time 
people have heard about lead in drinking water. The bill establishes a 
basic public education program to ensure that people have a basic 
understanding that lead may be present in drinking water and what the 
corrective actions might be even before their water system detects a 
problem.
  Right now, EPA can't say if we have a national problem or not. We 
need one-time nationwide testing for lead in drinking water at all 
water systems to determine if DC is an isolated case or if there are 
other ``sleeping giants'' out there.
  The bill requires increased water testing and lead remediation in 
schools and day-care centers nationwide. This provision exists in law 
today, but it was affected by previous litigation. This bill corrects 
the problem by requiring the Administrator to execute this program if 
States choose not to. It is wholly unacceptable to do anything less 
than provide a learning environment for our next generation that does 
not degrade their intellectual capacity. Our bill provides $150 million 
over five years for this program. And we strengthen existing 
requirements to ensure that ALL lead service lines will be replaced by 
a public water system at a rate of 10 percent per year until they are 
gone. It provides more Federal funding to upgrade water distribution 
systems to replace lead service lines.
  This is common sense--let's get rid of the lead in our distribution 
systems and get rid of the lead in our water.
  Our bill makes the water systems responsible for replacing lead 
service lines, including the privately-owned sections, once a system 
exceeds lead standards. Homeowners have the final say in whether their 
line is replaced. We provide $1 billion over five years for lead 
service line replacement.
  The EPA estimates that our Nation needs 265 billion dollars to 
maintain and improve its drinking water infrastructure over the next 
twenty years. If we don't address this, we will be facing more and more 
health and environmental issues as our Nation's water infrastructure 
degrades.
  Lead service lines are only one part of the picture. Leaded solder 
was banned in 1987. However, ``lead-free'' plumbing fixtures are 
currently allowed to have eight percent lead. Our bill bans leaded 
plumbing fixtures and components.
  It is time to get the lead out of our pipes, out of our water, out of 
our families and out of our lives. Safe drinking water is not a 
privilege; it is a right--whether you live in Washington, DC, or 
Washington State or Washington County, VT.
  We hope to move this bill this year. My Committee is scheduled to 
consider water infrastructure legislation later this month, and I think 
the ``Lead-Free Drinking Water Act of 2004'' would be an important 
addition to that bill.
  I just want to say it has been an honor to work with Senator 
Sarbanes, Congresswoman Norton, and Congressman Waxman on this vitally 
important issue.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Ensign):
  S. 2378. A bill to provide for the conveyance of certain public land 
in Clark County, Nevada, for use as a heliport; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President. I arise today to introduce legislation to 
establish a public heliport facility in Clark County, NV.
  The purpose of my bill is simple: It would convey about a third of a 
square mile of public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management to 
Clark County for dedicated use as a heliport. The land is located just 
south of the Henderson city limits and east of Interstate 15.
  The establishment of this heliport will help eliminate the ongoing 
conflict between air tour operators whose overflights of the Grand 
Canyon represent a classic component of the Las Vegas visitor 
experience and residents in the west-central and southwestern parts of 
the Las Vegas Valley whose every day lives are adversely affected by 
helicopter noise.
  For many months now, local officials have sought to establish a 
heliport on County or private land within the Las Vegas Valley. Their 
chosen site is currently a go-kart track near Interstate 15 near 
Henderson. If this site is developed as a heliport facility, helicopter 
tour operators will soon be flying over the Sloan Canyon National 
Conservation Area. In fact, if Congress does not enact my bill, air 
tours will soon be flying over Sloan Canyon itself--one of the richest 
petroglyph sites in the Mohave Desert. That outcome would be entirely 
legal, entirely predictable and entirely regrettable.
  In 2002, I worked closely with Senator Ensign, Congresswoman Berkley, 
Congressman Gibbons and local advocates to ensure protection of the 
Sloan Canyon area and its unique cultural resources. Through our 
combined efforts we created the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area 
and the McCullough Mountains Wilderness. I am proud of these efforts 
and today I offer this legislation as a further effort to protect

[[Page 8245]]

the precious resources that we worked to safeguard in 2002.
  The bill I am introducing in the Senate today would not prohibit 
helicopter overflights of the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area 
but it would ensure that such flights steer clear of the most sensitive 
and special cultural resources and minimize the impact on the majestic 
bighorn sheep and other wildlife that live in the McCullough Mountains.
  My legislation stipulates that any helicopter flight originating from 
and/or landing at this heliport would be required by law to fly no 
further than 5 miles north of the southernmost boundary of the Sloan 
Canyon National Conservation Area and at least 500 to 1000 feet above 
ground level while in the NCA. Further, it requires that every such 
light contribute 3 dollars per passenger to a special fund dedicated to 
the protection of the cultural, wilderness, and wildlife resources in 
Nevada.
  These provisions justify conveying the land to Clark County at no 
cost because they provide a stable, long-term source of funding in 
excess of the market value of the land and because the conveyance and 
use are in the public interest.
  I look forward to working with the Chairman and Ranking member of the 
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and my other Senate 
colleagues to ensure swift passage of this important 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. 2378

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

     SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY TO CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Las Vegas Valley in the State of Nevada is the 
     fastest growing community in the United States;
       (2) helicopter tour operations are conflicting with the 
     needs of long-established residential communities in the 
     Valley; and
       (3) the designation of a public heliport in the Valley that 
     would reduce conflicts between helicopter tour operators and 
     residential communities is in the public interest.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to provide a 
     suitable location for the establishment of a commercial 
     service heliport facility to serve the Las Vegas Valley in 
     the State of Nevada while minimizing and mitigating the 
     impact of air tours on the Sloan Canyon National Conservation 
     Area and North McCullough Mountains Wilderness.
       (c) Definitions.--In this Act:
       (1) Conservation area.--The term ``Conservation Area'' 
     means the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area established 
     by section 604(a) of the Clark County Conservation of Public 
     Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2010).
       (2) County.--The term ``County'' means Clark County, 
     Nevada.
       (3) Helicopter tour.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``helicopter tour'' means a 
     commercial helicopter tour operated for profit.
       (B) Exclusion.--The term ``helicopter tour'' does not 
     include a helicopter tour that is carried out to assist a 
     Federal, State, or local agency.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (5) Wilderness.--The term ``Wilderness'' means the North 
     McCullough Mountains Wilderness established by section 
     202(a)(13) of the Clark County Conservation of Public Land 
     and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2000).
       (d) Conveyance.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall convey to the 
     County, subject to valid existing rights, for no 
     consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to the parcel of land described in subsection 
     (e).
       (e) Description of Land.--The parcel of land to be conveyed 
     under subsection (d) is the parcel of approximately 229 acres 
     of land depicted as tract A on the map entitled ``Clark 
     County Public Heliport Facility'' and dated May 3, 2004.
       (f) Use of Land.--
       (1) In general.--The parcel of land conveyed under 
     subsection (d)--
       (A) shall be used by the County for the operation of a 
     heliport facility under the conditions stated in paragraphs 
     (2) and (3); and
       (B) shall not be disposed of by the County.
       (2) Imposition of fees.--
       (A) In general.--Any operator of a helicopter tour 
     originating from or concluding at the parcel of land 
     described in subsection (e) shall pay to the Clark County 
     Department of Aviation a $3 conservation fee for each 
     passenger on the helicopter tour if any portion of the 
     helicopter tour occurs over the Conservation Area.
       (B) Disposition of funds.--Any amounts collected under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be deposited in a special account in 
     the Treasury of the United States, which shall be available 
     to the Secretary, without further appropriation, for the 
     management of cultural, wildlife, and wilderness resources on 
     public land in the State of Nevada.
       (3) Flight path.--Except for safety reasons, any helicopter 
     tour originating or concluding at the parcel of land 
     described in subsection (e) that flies over the Conservation 
     Area shall not fly--
       (A) over any area in the Conservation Area except the area 
     that is between 3 and 5 miles north of the latitude of the 
     southernmost boundary of the Conservation Area;
       (B) lower than 1,000 feet over the eastern segments of the 
     boundary of the Conservation Area; or
       (C) lower than 500 feet over the western segments of the 
     boundary of the Conservation Area.
       (4) Reversion.--If the County ceases to use any of the land 
     described in subsection (d) for the purpose described in 
     paragraph (1)(A) and under the conditions stated in 
     paragraphs (2) and (3)--
       (A) title to the parcel shall revert to the United States, 
     at the option of the United States; and
       (B) the County shall be responsible for any reclamation 
     necessary to revert the parcel to the United States.
       (g) Administrative Costs.--The Secretary shall require, as 
     a condition of the conveyance under subsection (d), that the 
     County pay the administrative costs of the conveyance, 
     including survey costs and any other costs associated with 
     the transfer of title.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SUNUNU (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Warner, and Mr. 
        Gregg):
  S. 2380. A bill to authorize the President to issue posthumously to 
the late William ``Billy'' Mitchell a commission as major general, 
United States Army; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. SUNUNU. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to honor one 
of the Nation's great military visionaries, the late William ``Billy'' 
Mitchell. My legislation would correct an injustice that has existed 
for almost eight decades by calling on the President to posthumously 
award Billy Mitchell a commission as major general in the United States 
Army.
  I would like to first recognize the support this measure has received 
from the Senator from Alaska, Mr. Stevens, the Chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee and the Subcommittee on Defense 
Appropriations, the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, the Chairman of 
the Armed Services Committee, and the Senator from New Hampshire, Mr. 
Gregg, who is a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. And 
I would also like to commend my colleague in the House, Mr. Bass, who, 
with the support of House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, 
steered identical legislation to unanimous passage in that chamber in 
the fall of last year. I am pleased to join my colleagues as we 
recognize the accomplishments of this important figure in our country's 
military history.
  Billy Mitchell joined the Army at age 18 in 1898. As he quickly rose 
in rank, he began to realize the incredible potential for air power in 
establishing military superiority. After World War I, Billy Mitchell 
became a brigadier general and deputy commander of the Air Service, and 
in this position he began pressing senior military officials and the 
White House for increased funding for the development of a formidable 
air force. In fact, he conducted a test for senior Army and Navy 
officials in the Chesapeake Bay in 1921 that bolstered his contention 
that air power represented the future of combat, while embarrassing 
many naysayers.
  Although Billy Mitchell was long on vision and foresight, he was 
short on tact. After the 1921 test, his relationship with his superiors 
deteriorated as his very public battle for Air Service funding had 
taken an increasingly bitter tone, and after an accident that took the 
lives of Navy sailors, Mitchell accused senior military leaders of 
``almost treasonable administration of the national defense.'' He was 
court-martialed for insubordination, found guilty, sentenced to 5 years 
loss of pay, and demoted to the rank of colonel. Yet to the surprise of 
no one, Billy Mitchell continued to be a strong and effective voice in 
support of air power after resigning his commission in 1926 until his 
untimely death 10 years later.

[[Page 8246]]

  Billy Mitchell sacrificed his career to help change the way our 
country defends itself and projects military force across the globe to 
protect and preserve freedom. We have seen over time--most recently 
during the war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq--how important air 
power is in achieving our military objectives. Mitchell's 
prognostications many years ago about the future of air power has been 
proven correct many times over, and it is now time for our nation to 
recognize the enormous contribution Billy Mitchell has made to the 
citizens and soldiers of the United States of America. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill to finally give the late Billy Mitchell 
the rank of major general, United States Army.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Feingold, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 2381. A bill to provide for earned adjustment to reward work, 
reunify families, establish a temporary worker program that protects 
United States and foreign workers and strengthen national security 
under the immigration laws of the United States; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to introduce the Safe 
Orderly Legal Visas and Enforcement (SOLVE) Act of 2004.
  Much of the Nation's economy today depends on the hard work and the 
many contributions of immigrants. Many industries depend heavily on 
immigrant labor. These workers enrich our Nation and improve the 
quality of our lives. Yet millions of today's immigrant workers are 
undocumented. These workers and their families live in constant fear of 
deportation, and are easy targets of abuse and exploitation by 
unscrupulous employers and by criminals. Many risk great danger, and 
even death, to cross our borders.
  For important reasons--to strengthen national security, to guarantee 
sound economic and labor practices, and to ensure fundamental 
fairness--it is essential to reform our immigration system. We need 
immigration policies that provide a safe, orderly system where legality 
is the prevailing norm. We need immigration policies that reflect 
current economic realities, that respect the core values of family 
unity and fundamental fairness and that uphold our proud tradition as a 
Nation of immigrants.
  These are complex issues, deserving careful consideration and debate. 
But they are also issues that demand immediate attention. Our bill 
creates a genuine earned legalization program for undocumented workers 
and a revised temporary worker program with protections for both U.S. 
and foreign workers. It also creates a realistic path to citizenship 
for all deserving immigrants, and takes clear steps to reunite 
immigrant families.
  The legislation will benefit both workers and businesses. It improves 
wages and working conditions, and provides an effective way for 
foreign-born workers to become permanent residents if they wish to do 
so. It benefits immigrant families by reducing the unacceptable 
backlogs and obstacles that have separated families for too many years.
  Family unity has always been a fundamental cornerstone of America's 
immigration policy. Despite this fact, over three million individuals 
are awaiting immigrant visas in order to reunite with their families. 
This bill will allow immigrant families to be reunited more quickly and 
humanely. It also removes other obstacles in our current immigration 
laws that are separating families, such as the stringent affidavit-of-
support requirements and the bars to admissibility.
  No immigration proposal is complete without an earned adjustment 
program. Hard-working immigrants living in the United States contribute 
to the economic growth and prosperity of our Nation. Immigrant workers 
are, and will continue to be, essential to the success of many American 
businesses. Our legislation will allow these long-term, tax-paying 
immigrants to apply for earned adjustment of status, providing 
employers with a more stable workforce and improving the wages and 
working conditions of all workers.
  A revised temporary worker program is a necessary component of any 
immigration reform, but it cannot stand alone. It must be enacted in 
conjunction with earned legalization and family unity priorities, and 
it must avoid the troubling legacy of exploitation that has marred past 
guest worker programs.
  This legislation strikes a fair balance. It will ensure that 
individuals participating in the program receive the same labor 
protections as those given to U.S. workers, including the right to 
organize, the right to change jobs between employers and economic 
sectors, and the protection of wages, hours, and working conditions. 
Anything else would subject migrants to abuse, and undermine the jobs, 
wages and working conditions of U.S. workers. The bill also provides 
participants with an opportunity to become permanent residents, and 
eventually citizens, if they wish to do so. Without such an 
opportunity, we will be creating second class status for temporary 
workers.
  Since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, we can no longer 
tolerate policies that fail to protect and control our borders. For the 
last decade, Congress has invested millions of dollars to vastly 
increase the number of immigration border patrol agents, improve 
surveillance technology, and install other controls to strengthen 
border enforcement, especially at our southwest border. Yet, almost 
everyone will agree that these policies have failed to stop illegal 
immigration. The proof is in the numbers--several hundred thousand 
people continue to enter the U.S. illegally each year.
  Our border enforcement strategy has, in effect, diverted migration 
flows to the most inhospitable desert and mountain terrains, causing 
dramatic increases in deaths due to exposure to the elements. According 
to statistics from the U.S. Border Patrol, since 1998 nearly 2,000 
people have died making the treacherous journey across our southern 
border. Desperate migrants are being drawn into criminal smuggling 
syndicates, increasing the danger of violence to border patrol agents, 
border communities, and the migrant themselves. As Stephen Flynn, an 
expert on terrorism, noted at a recent Congressional hearing, these 
``draconian measures'' have produced chaos at our borders, which 
``makes it ideal for exploitation by criminals and terrorists.''
  Our borders must be safe and secure. Although no terrorists have been 
apprehended crossing the southern border, the conditions there are ripe 
for abuse. Our present enforcement policies are not effective. Our bill 
will replace the chaotic, deadly illegal crossings along our southwest 
border with orderly and safe legal avenues for immigrant workers and 
immigrant families. Substantially legalizing the flow of people at our 
borders will strengthen our security and substantially reduce criminal 
activities, enabling immigration enforcement agents to focus their 
resources on terrorists and criminals attempting to enter the country. 
The bill will strengthen national security by encouraging undocumented 
persons to come forward to become legal.
  We have a unique opportunity to reform the current immigration 
system, and apply sensible policies that reaffirm our commitment to 
family unity, fundamental fairness, economic opportunity, and humane 
treatment.
  The bill we are introducing today will achieve the full reforms we 
need. A good first step would be to enact two bills that are already 
pending--the AgJOBS bill to reform the immigration laws for migrant 
workers, and the DREAM Act, to enable undocumented high school students 
to qualify for legal status so they can attend college. The 
Administration's wholehearted endorsements of these two bills would 
guarantee their immediate passage. Let's at least get these bills done 
now. We cannot afford any more delays.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to reform our 
immigration laws. It's time to make these long-overdue reforms happen.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INOUYE:
  S. 2382. A bill to establish grant programs for the development of 
telecommunications capacities in Indian

[[Page 8247]]

country; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill that is long 
overdue and much needed in Indian country.
  On May 22nd of last year, the Committee on Indian Affairs held a 
hearing on the status of telecommunications across Native America. 
Testimony received at that hearing and reports of Federal agencies that 
were made part of the hearing record indicate that there is most 
definitely a vast difference in access to the most basic 
telecommunications services.
  For instance, telephone service to Indian homes is from 30 to 60 
percent less than the national average, and only 10 percent of Indian 
homes have Internet service.
  The bill that I introduce today is modeled after the community 
development block grant program and provides authorization for the 
establishment of two block grant programs in the Department of 
Commerce. The first block grant would enable tribal governments to 
develop the necessary infrastructure to support expanded 
telecommunications capabilities, to develop comprehensive plans for 
enhancing telecommunications services in Indian communities, and to 
provide support for telemedicine.
  The second block grant program would support the provision of 
training and technical assistance in the very complex field of 
telecommunications.
  The objectives of this bill can be rather simply stated. For too 
long, when it comes to access to even the most basic telecommunications 
services--telephone and Internet access--we have relegated Indian 
country to third world status. We must bridge this gap--it is that 
fundamental.
  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. 2382

       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 ``Native American Connectivity 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1)(A) disparities exist in the areas of education, health 
     care, workforce training, commerce, and economic activity of 
     Indians due to the rural nature of most Indian reservations; 
     and
       (B) access to basic and advanced telecommunications 
     infrastructure is critical in eliminating those disparities;
       (2) currently, only 67.9 percent of Indian homes have 
     telephone service, compared with the national average of 95.1 
     percent;
       (3) the telephone service penetration rate on some 
     reservations is as low as 39 percent;
       (4) even on reservations and trust land, non-Indian homes 
     are more likely to have telephone service than Indian homes;
       (5) only 10 percent of Indian households on tribal land 
     have Internet access;
       (6) only 17 percent of Indian tribes have developed 
     comprehensive technology plans;
       (7) training and technical assistance have been identified 
     as the most significant needs for the development and 
     effective use of telecommunications and information 
     technology in Indian country;
       (8) funding for telecommunications and information 
     technology projects in Indian country remains inadequate to 
     address the needs of Indian communities;
       (9) many Indian tribes are located on or adjacent to Indian 
     land in which unemployment rates exceed 50 percent;
       (10) the lack of telecommunications infrastructure and low 
     telephone and Internet penetration rates adversely affects 
     the ability of Indian tribes to pursue economic development 
     opportunities; and
       (11) health care, disease prevention education, and 
     cultural preservation are greatly enhanced with access to and 
     use of telecommunications technology and electronic 
     information.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to promote affordable and universal access among Indian 
     tribal governments, tribal entities, and Indian households to 
     telecommunications and information technology in Indian 
     country;
       (2) to encourage and promote tribal economic development, 
     self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments;
       (3) to enhance the health of Indian tribal members through 
     the availability and use of telemedicine and telehealth; and
       (4) to assist in the retention and preservation of native 
     languages and cultural traditions.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Block grant.--The term ``block grant'' means a grant 
     provided under section 5.
       (2) Eligible activity.--The term ``eligible activity'' 
     means an activity carried out--
       (A) to acquire or lease real property (including licensed 
     spectrum, water rights, dark fiber, exchanges, and other 
     related interests) to provide telecommunications services, 
     facilities, and improvements;
       (B) to acquire, construct, reconstruct, or install 
     telecommunications facilities, sites, or improvements 
     (including design features), or utilities;
       (C) to retain any real property acquired under this Act for 
     tribal communications purposes;
       (D) to pay the non-Federal share required by a Federal 
     grant program undertaken as part of activities funded under 
     this Act;
       (E) to carry out activities necessary--
       (i) to develop a comprehensive telecommunications 
     development plan; and
       (ii) to develop a policy, planning, and management capacity 
     so that an eligible entity may more rationally and 
     effectively--

       (I) determine the needs of the entity;
       (II) set long term and short term goals;
       (III) devise programs and activities to meet the goals of 
     the entity, including, if appropriate, telehealth;
       (IV) evaluate the progress of the programs and activities 
     in meeting the goals; and
       (V) carry out management, coordination, and monitoring of 
     activities necessary for effective planning implementation;

       (F) to pay reasonable administrative costs and carrying 
     charges relating to the planning and execution of 
     telecommunications development activities, including the 
     provision of information and resources about the planning and 
     execution of the activities to residents of areas in which 
     telecommunications development activities are to be 
     concentrated;
       (G) to increase the capacity of an eligible entity to carry 
     out telecommunications activities;
       (H) to provide assistance to institutions of higher 
     education that have a demonstrated capacity to carry out 
     eligible activities;
       (I) to enable an eligible entity to facilitate 
     telecommunications development by--
       (i) providing technical assistance, advice, and business 
     support services (including services for developing business 
     plans, securing funding, and conducting marketing); and
       (ii) providing general support (including peer support 
     programs and mentoring programs) to Indian tribes in 
     developing telecommunications projects;
       (J) to evaluate eligible activities to ascertain and 
     promote effective telecommunications and information 
     technology deployment practices and usages among Indian 
     tribes; or
       (K) to provide research, analysis, data collection, data 
     organization, and dissemination of information relevant to 
     telecommunications and information technology in Indian 
     country for the purpose of promoting effective 
     telecommunications and information technology deployment 
     practices and usages among tribes.
       (3) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
       (A) an Indian tribe;
       (B) an Indian organization;
       (C) a tribal college or university;
       (D) an intertribal organization; or
       (E) a private or public institution of higher education 
     acting jointly with an Indian tribe.
       (4) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce.
       (6) Technical assistance.--The term ``technical 
     assistance'' means the facilitation of skills and knowledge 
     in planning, developing, assessing, and administering 
     eligible activities.
       (7) Training and technical assistance grant.--The term 
     ``training and technical assistance grant'' means a grant 
     provided under section 6.
       (8) Tribal college or university.--The term ``tribal 
     college or university'' has the meaning given the term 
     ``tribally controlled college or university'' in section 2 of 
     the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act of 
     1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801), except that the term also includes an 
     institution listed in the Equity in Educational Land-Grant 
     Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note).
       (9) Telehealth.--The term ``telehealth'' means the use of 
     electronic information and telecommunications technologies to 
     support long-distance clinical health care, patient and 
     professional health-related education, public health, and 
     health administration.

     SEC. 5. BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     National Telecommunications and Information Administration a 
     Native American telecommunications block grant program to 
     provide grants on a competitive basis to eligible entities to 
     carry out eligible activities under subsection (c).
       (b) Block Grants.--The Secretary may provide a block grant 
     to an eligible entity that submits a block grant application 
     to the Secretary for approval.

[[Page 8248]]

       (c) Eligible Activities.--A grant under this section may 
     only be used for an eligible activity.
       (d) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate 
     regulations establishing specific criteria for the 
     competition conducted to select eligible entities to receive 
     grants under this section for each fiscal year.

     SEC. 6. TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.

       (a) Notification and Criteria.--The Secretary--
       (1) shall provide notice of the availability of training 
     and technical assistance grants; and
       (2) publish criteria for selecting recipients.
       (b) Grants.--The Secretary may provide training and 
     technical assistance grants to eligible entities with a 
     demonstrated capacity to carry out eligible activities.
       (c) Use of Funds.--A training and technical assistance 
     grant shall be used--
       (1) to develop a training program for telecommunications 
     employees; or
       (2) to provide assistance to students who--
       (A) participate in telecommunications or information 
     technology work study programs; and
       (B) are enrolled in a full-time graduate or undergraduate 
     program in telecommunications-related education, development, 
     planning, or management.
       (d) Setaside.--
       (1) In general.--For each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     set aside $2,000,000 of the amount made available under 
     section 12 for training and technical assistance grants, to 
     remain available until expended.
       (2) Treatment.--A training and technical assistance grant 
     to an entity shall be in addition to any block grant provided 
     to the entity.
       (e) Provision of Technical Assistance by the Secretary.--
     The Secretary may provide technical assistance, directly or 
     through contracts, to--
       (1) tribal governments; and
       (2) persons or entities that assist tribal governments.

     SEC. 7. COMPLIANCE.

       (a) Audit by the Comptroller General.--
       (1) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States may audit any financial transaction involving grant 
     funds that is carried out by a block grant recipient or 
     training and technical assistance grant recipient.
       (2) Scope of authority.--In conducting an audit under 
     paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall have access to 
     all books, accounts, records, reports, files, and other 
     papers, things, or property belonging to or in use by the 
     grant recipient that relate to the financial transaction and 
     are necessary to facilitate the audit.
       (3) Regulations.--The Comptroller General shall promulgate 
     regulations to carry out this subsection.
       (b) Environmental Protection.--
       (1) In general.--After consultation with Indian tribes, the 
     Secretary may promulgate regulations to carry out this 
     subsection that--
       (A) ensure that the policies of the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and other laws 
     that further the purposes of that Act (as specified by the 
     regulations), are most effectively implemented in connection 
     with the expenditure of funds under this Act; and
       (B) assure the public of undiminished protection of the 
     environment.
       (2) Substitute measures.--Subject to paragraph (3), the 
     Secretary may provide for the release of funds under this Act 
     for eligible activities to grant recipients that assume all 
     of the responsibilities for environmental review, 
     decisionmaking, and related action under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), 
     and other laws that further the purposes of that Act (as 
     specified by the regulations promulgated under paragraph 
     (1)), that would apply to the Secretary if the Secretary 
     carried out the eligible activities as Federal projects.
       (3) Release.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall approve the release of 
     funds under paragraph (2) only if, at least 15 days prior to 
     approval, the grant recipient submits to the Secretary a 
     request for release accompanied by a certification that meets 
     the requirements of paragraph (4).
       (B) Approval.--The approval by the Secretary of a 
     certification shall be deemed to satisfy the responsibilities 
     of the Secretary under the National Environmental Policy Act 
     of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the laws specified by 
     the regulations promulgated under paragraph (1), to the 
     extent that those responsibilities relate to the release of 
     funds for projects described in the certification.
       (4) Certification.--A certification shall--
       (A) be in a form acceptable to the Secretary;
       (B) be executed by the tribal government;
       (C) specify that the grant recipient has fully assumed the 
     responsibilities described in paragraph (2); and
       (D) specify that the tribal officer--
       (i) assumes the status of a responsible Federal official 
     under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
     U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and each law specified by the 
     regulations promulgated under paragraph (1), to the extent 
     that the provisions of that Act or law apply; and
       (ii) is authorized to consent, and consents, on behalf of 
     the grant recipient and on behalf of the tribal officer to 
     accept the jurisdiction of the Federal courts for enforcement 
     of the responsibilities of the tribal officer as a 
     responsible Federal official.

     SEC. 8. REMEDIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.

       (a) Failure to Comply.--If the Secretary finds, on the 
     record after opportunity for an agency hearing, that a block 
     grant recipient or training and technical assistance grant 
     recipient has failed to comply substantially with any 
     provision of this Act, the Secretary, until satisfied that 
     there is no longer a failure to comply, shall--
       (1) terminate payments to the grant recipient;
       (2) reduce payments to the grant recipient by an amount 
     equal to the amount of payments that were not expended in 
     accordance with this Act;
       (3) limit the availability of payments under this Act to 
     programs, projects, or activities not affected by the failure 
     to comply; or
       (4) refer the matter to the Attorney General with a 
     recommendation that the Attorney General bring an appropriate 
     civil action.
       (b) Action by the Attorney General.--After a referral by 
     the Secretary under subsection (a)(4), the Attorney General 
     may bring a civil action in United States district court for 
     appropriate relief (including mandatory relief, injunctive 
     relief, and recovery of the amount of the assistance provided 
     under this Act that was not expended in accordance with this 
     Act).

     SEC. 9. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Annual Report to Congress.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the end of each fiscal year in which assistance under 
     this Act is provided, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report that includes--
       (1) a description of the progress made in accomplishing the 
     objectives of this Act;
       (2) a summary of the use of funds under this Act during the 
     preceding fiscal year; and
       (3) an evaluation of the status of telephone, Internet, and 
     personal computer penetration rates, by type of technology, 
     among Indian households throughout Indian country on a tribe-
     by-tribe basis.
       (b) Reports to Secretary.--The Secretary may require grant 
     recipients under this Act to submit reports and other 
     information necessary for the Secretary to prepare the report 
     under subsection (a).

     SEC. 10. CONSULTATION.

       In carrying out this Act, the Secretary shall consult with 
     other Federal agencies administering Federal grant programs.

     SEC. 11. HISTORIC PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS.

       A telecommunications project funded under this Act shall 
     comply with the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 
     470 et seq.).

     SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act--
       (1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
       (2) such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal 
     year.
       (b) Availability.--Funds made available under subsection 
     (a) shall remain available until expended.

                          ____________________