[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1019-1045]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. THOMAS:
  S. 203. A bill to reduce temporarily the royalty required to be paid 
for sodium produced on Federal lands, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Soda Ash 
Royalty Reduction Act of 2005,'' a bill to limit the Federal royalty on 
soda ash. This legislation, if passed, will put people back to work in 
my State and address the important issue of maintaining a strong and 
financially sound manufacturing base in this country. It will keep jobs 
in America and give workers a fighting chance to compete globally.
  The State of Wyoming accounts for 85 percent of the natural soda ash 
produced in the United States. The health of the domestic soda ash 
industry is now at issue. This legislation goes a long way towards 
assisting the domestic industry to be competitive on a global basis.
  The bill reduces an excessive tax on natural American soda ash; a tax 
that is significantly impairing the ability of U.S. exported soda ash 
to compete in important global markets; a tax that has helped create 30 
percent decline in employment in this industry in Wyoming since 1997. 
The current 6 percent royalty on each ton of domestically produced soda 
ash was imposed in 1995 at a time when our exports of this important 
commodity, primarily used in the manufacture of glass were rising to 
record levels. It was a windfall tax that recognized the industry's 
significant expansion.
  Over the last decade, export growth has been severely impacted, as 
several trading partners erected various barriers to U.S. soda ash, 
often to protect their own less efficient domestic producers. One of 
the most aggressive countries has been China. As recently as 1990, 
China imported over one million tons of soda ash annually from the U.S. 
Today, China exports two million tons from plants that produce a 
synthetic grade of this important commodity.
  The Chinese produce soda ash in far less efficient factories with 
limited attention to environmental or safety concerns. The average wage 
of a Chinese worker in these plants is less than $5 a day. By contrast 
Wyoming soda ash workers can earn on average $35 an hour. Chinese soda 
ash producers, which are largely state owned, also benefit from direct 
and indirect forms of state support, as well as the benefits of a fixed 
exchange rate. As a result of these actions, China has supplanted the 
United States as the world's largest exporter of soda ash.
  Wyoming soda ash producers remain the most efficient in the world and 
have been constantly improving their productivity over the last several 
years. It is an industry that is reinventing itself to meet the demands 
of fierce global competition.
  My legislation restores the original royalty the Federal Government 
imposed on soda ash in the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. That act set a 
2 percent royalty on soda ash mined on Federal leases. We would 
temporarily resume that royalty rate consistent with the Federal Land 
Policy and Management Act of 1976 that requires the Secretary of the 
Interior to receive ``fair market value'' for the use of public lands 
and their resources. In other words, the legislation simply adjusts 
what was a windfall tax back to its original level.
  The legislation is overdue and keeps our Nation's commitment to U.S. 
based manufacturing and jobs. The U.S. soda ash industry has been a 
good partner with the Federal Government, providing additional revenue 
when business was flourishing. Now that the industry is fighting for 
its survival, the Federal Government has the opportunity to be a 
responsible partner and ease its tax burden so it can survive and 
provide the thousands of jobs that are so important to my State.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Vitter):
  S. 204. A bill to establish the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area in 
the State of Louisiana; to the Committeee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I rise, along with Senator Vitter, 
to introduce a bill to establish the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area 
in Louisiana. This legislation has particularly special meaning to 
those of us from Louisiana because of the importance of the cultural 
and natural resources of the Atchafalaya region to the Nation. It would 
establish a framework to help protect, conserve, and promote these 
unique natural, cultural, historical, and recreational resources of the 
region.
  This legislation, which has been passed by the full Senate 3 times, 
once during the 107th Congress and twice during the 108th Congress, 
would establish a framework to help protect, conserve, and promote 
these unique natural, cultural, historical, and recreational resources 
of the region.
  Specifically, the legislation would establish a National Heritage 
Area in Louisiana that encompasses thirteen parishes in and around the 
Atchafalaya Basin swamp, America's largest river swamp. The heritage 
area in south-central Louisiana stretches from Concordia parish to the 
north, where the Mississippi River begins to partially flow into the 
Atchafalaya River,

[[Page 1020]]

all the way to the Gulf of Mexico in the south. The thirteen parishes 
are: St. Mary, Iberia, St. Martin, St. Landry, Avoyelles, Pointe 
Coupee, Iberville, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafayette, West Baton Rouge, 
Concordia, and East Baton Rouge. This boundary is the same area covered 
by the existing Atchafalaya Trace State Heritage Area.
  This measure will appoint the existing Atchafalaya Trace Commission 
as the federally recognized ``local coordinating entity.'' The 
commission is composed of thirteen members with one representative 
appointed by each parish in the heritage area. Both the Atchafalaya 
Trace Commission and the Atchafalaya Trace State Heritage Area were 
created by the Louisiana Legislature a number of years ago. The 
Atchafalaya Trace State Heritage Area program currently receives some 
State funding, and already has staff working at the Louisiana 
Department of Culture, Recreation & Tourism, DCRT, under Lieutenant 
Governor Kathleen Blanco. State funds were used to create the 
management plan for the heritage area, which followed ``feasibility 
analysis'' guidelines as recommended by the National Park Service. 
Therefore, the recently-completed management plan need only be 
submitted to the Secretary of the Interior for approval as this 
legislation would recognize an existing local coordinating entity that 
will oversee the implementation of this plan. We are very proud that 
this state heritage area has already completed the complicated planning 
process, with participation of local National Park Service 
representatives, while using a standard of planning quality equal to 
that of existing national heritage areas. All at no cost to the Federal 
Government.
  Please let me also emphasize that this legislation protects existing 
private property rights. It will not interfere with local land use 
ordinances or regulations, as it is specifically prohibited from doing 
so. Nor does this legislation grant any powers of real property 
acquisition to the local coordinating entity or heritage area program. 
In addition, the legislation does not impose any environmental rule or 
process or cause any change in Federal environmental quality standards 
different from those already in effect.
  Heritage areas are based on cooperation and collaboration at all 
levels. This legislation remains true to the core concept behind 
heritage areas. The heritage area concept has been used successfully in 
various parts of our Nation to promote historic preservation, natural 
and cultural resource protection, heritage tourism and sustainable 
economic revitalization for both urban and rural areas. Heritage areas 
provide a flexible framework for government agencies, private 
organizations and businesses and landowners to work together on a 
coordinated regional basis. The Atchafalaya National Heritage Area will 
join the Cane River National Heritage Area to become the second 
National Heritage Area in Louisiana, ultimately joining the 23 existing 
National Heritage Areas around the Nation.
  The initiative to develop the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area is 
an outgrowth of a grassroots effort to achieve multiple goals of this 
region. Most important among these is providing opportunities for the 
future, while at the same time not losing anything that makes this 
place so special. Residents from all over the region, local tourism 
agencies, State agencies such as the DCRT and the Department of Natural 
Resources, the State legislature, Federal agencies including the 
National Park Service and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, parish 
governments, conservation and preservation groups, local businesses and 
local landowners have all participated in this endeavor to make it the 
strong initiative it is today. These groups have been very supportive 
of the heritage area effort, and as time moves on, the heritage area 
will continue to involve more and more of the area's most important 
resource, its people.
  I would also like to give you a brief overview of the resources that 
make this place significant to the entire country. Not only is it 
important to our Nation's history, but it is also critical to 
understanding America's future. The name of the place itself, 
Atchafalaya, comes from the American Indians and means ``long river.'' 
This name signifies the first settlers of the region, descendants of 
whom still live there today.
  Other words come to mind in describing the Atchafalaya: mysterious, 
dynamic, multi-cultural, enchanting, bountiful, threatened and 
undiscovered. This region is one of the most complex and least 
understood places in Louisiana and the Nation. Yet, the stories of the 
Atchafalaya Heritage Area are emblematic of the broader American 
experience. Here there are opportunities to understand and witness the 
complicated, sometimes harmonious, sometimes adversarial interplay 
between nature and culture. The history of the United States has been 
shaped by the complex dance of its people working with, against, and 
for, nature. Within the Atchafalaya a penchant for adventure, 
adaptation, ingenuity, and exploitation has created a cultural legacy 
unlike anywhere else in the world.
  The heart of the heritage area is the Atchafalaya Basin. It is the 
largest river swamp in the United States, larger than the more widely 
known Everglades or Okefenokee Swamp. The Atchafalaya is characterized 
by a maze of streams, and at one time was thickly forested with old-
growth cypress and tupelo trees. The Basin provides outstanding habitat 
for a remarkably diverse array of wildlife, including the endangered 
American bald eagle and Louisiana black bear. The region's unique 
ecology teems with life. More than 85 species of fish; crustaceans, 
such as crawfish; wildlife, including alligators; an astonishing array 
of well over 200 species of birds, from waterfowl to songbirds; forest-
dwelling mammals such as deer, squirrel, beaver and other commercially 
important furbearers all make their home here. Bottomland hardwood-
dependent bird species breed here in some of the highest densities ever 
recorded in annual North American Breeding Bird Surveys. The Basin also 
forms part of the Mississippi Valley Flyway for migratory waterfowl and 
is a major wintering ground for thousands of these geese and ducks. In 
general, the Atchafalaya Basin has a significant proportion of North 
America's breeding wading birds, such as herons, egrets, ibises, and 
spoonbills. Some of the largest flocks of Wood Storks in North America 
summer here, and the southern part of the Basin has a healthy 
population of Bald Eagles nesting every winter.
  The region's dynamic system of waterways, geology, and massive 
earthen guide levees reveals a landscape that is at once fragile and 
awesome. The geology and natural systems of the Atchafalaya Heritage 
Area have fueled the economy of the region for centuries. For decades 
the harvest of cypress, cotton, sugar cane, crawfish, salt, oil, gas, 
and Spanish moss, have been important sources of income for the 
region's residents. The crawfish industry has been particularly 
important to the lives of Atchafalaya residents and Louisiana has 
become the largest crawfish producer in the United States. Sport 
fishing and other forms of commercial fishing are important here, too, 
but unfortunately, natural resource extraction and a changing 
environment have drastically depleted many of these resources and 
forced residents to find new ways to make a living.
  Over the past century, the Atchafalaya Basin has become a study of 
man's monumental effort to control nature. After the catastrophic 
Mississippi River flood of 1927 left thousands dead and millions 
displaced, the U.S. Congress decreed that the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers should develop an intricate system of levees to protect human 
settlements, particularly New Orleans. Today, the Mississippi River is 
caged within the walls of earthen and concrete levees and manipulated 
with a complex system of locks, barrages and floodgates. The 
Atchafalaya River runs parallel to the Mississippi and through the 
center of the Basin. In times of flooding the river basin serves as the 
key floodway in controlling floodwaters headed for the large population 
centers of Baton

[[Page 1021]]

Rouge and New Orleans by diverting water from the Mississippi River to 
the Gulf of Mexico. This system was sorely tested in 1973 when 
floodwaters threatened to break through the floodgates and permanently 
divert the Mississippi River into the Atchafalaya. However, after this 
massive flood event, new land started forming off the coast. These new 
land formations make up the Atchafalaya Delta, and is the only 
significant area of new land being built in the United States. These 
vast amounts of Mississippi River sediment are also rapidly filling in 
the Basin itself, raising the level of land in certain areas of the 
basin and filling in lakes and waterways. And to demonstrate just how 
complex this ecosystem is, one only needs to realize that just to the 
East of the Delta, Terrebonne parish, also in the heritage area, is 
experiencing some of the most significant coastal land loss in the 
country.
  Over the centuries, the ever-changing natural environment has shaped 
the lives of the people living in the Basin. Residents have profited 
from and been imperiled by nature. The popular cultural identity of the 
region is strongly associated with the Cajuns, descendants of the 
French-speaking Acadians who settled in south Louisiana after being 
deported by the British from Nova Scotia, formerly known as Acadia. 
Twenty-five hundred to three thousand exiled Acadians repatriated in 
Louisiana where they proceeded to re-establish their former society. 
Today, in spite of complex social, cultural, and demographic 
transformations, Cajuns maintain a sense of group identity and continue 
to display a distinctive set of cultural expressions nearly 250 years 
after their exile from Acadia. Cajun culture has become increasingly 
popular outside of Louisiana. Culinary specialties adapted from France 
and Acadia such as etouffee, boudin, andouille, crepes, beignets and 
sauces thickened with roux, delight food lovers well beyond Louisiana's 
borders. Cajun music has also ``gone mainstream'' with its blend of 
French folk songs and ballads and instrumental dance music, and more 
recently popular country, rhythm-and-blues, and rock music influences. 
While the growing interest in Cajun culture has raised appreciation for 
its unique traditions, many of the region's residents are concerned 
about the growing commercialization and stereotyping that threatens to 
diminish the authentic Cajun ways of life.
  While the Atchafalaya Heritage Area may be well known for its Cajun 
culture, there is an astonishing array of other cultures within these 
parishes. Outside of New Orleans, the Atchafalaya Heritage Area is the 
most racially and ethnically complex region of Louisiana, and has been 
so for many years. A long legacy of multiculturalism presents 
interesting opportunities to examine how so many distinct cultures have 
survived in relative harmony. There may be interesting lessons to learn 
from here as our Nation becomes increasingly heterogeneous. The 
cultural complexity of this region has created a rich tapestry of 
history and traditions, evidenced by the architecture, music, language, 
food and festivals unlike any place else. Ethnic groups of the 
Atchafalaya include: African-Americans, Black Creoles, Asians, Chinese, 
Filipinos, Vietnamese, Lebanese, Cajuns, Spanish Islenos, Italians, 
Scotch-Irish, and American Indian tribes such as the Attakapa, 
Chitimacha, Coushatta, Houma, Opelousa and Tunica-Biloxi.
  This heritage area has a wealth of existing cultural, historic, 
natural, scenic, recreational and visitor resources on which to build. 
Scenic resources include numerous State Wildlife Management Areas and 
National Wildlife Refuges, as well as ten designated state scenic 
byways that fall partially or entirely within the heritage area. The 
Office of State Parks operates three historic sites in the heritage 
area, and numerous historic districts and buildings can be found in the 
region. There are also nine Main Street communities in the heritage 
area. Outdoor recreational resources include two State Parks and a 
multitude of waterways and bayous. Hunting, fishing, boating, and 
canoeing, and more recently birdwatching and cycling, are popular ways 
to experience the region. Various visitor attractions, interpretive 
centers and visitor information centers exist to help residents and 
tourists alike better understand and navigate many of the resources in 
the heritage area. Major roads link the heritage area's central visitor 
entrance points and large population centers, especially New Orleans. 
Much of the hospitality industry servicing the Atchafalaya exists 
around the larger cities of Baton Rouge, Lafayette and Houma. However, 
more and more bed and breakfasts and heritage accommodations, such as 
houseboat rentals, are becoming more numerous in the smaller towns and 
rural areas.
  These are just some of the examples of the richness and significance 
of this region. This legislation will assist communities throughout 
this heritage area who are committed to the conservation and 
appropriate development of these assets. Furthermore, this legislation 
will bring a level of prestige and national and international 
recognition that this most special of places certainly deserves.
  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. 204

       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 ``Atchafalaya National 
     Heritage Area Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Heritage area.--The term ``Heritage Area'' means the 
     Atchafalaya National Heritage Area established by section 
     3(a).
       (2) Local coordinating entity.--The term ``local 
     coordinating entity'' means the local coordinating entity for 
     the Heritage Area designated by section 3(c).
       (3) Management plan.--The term ``management plan'' means 
     the management plan for the Heritage Area developed under 
     section 5.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of 
     Louisiana.

     SEC. 3. ATCHAFALAYA NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established in the State the 
     Atchafalaya National Heritage Area.
       (b) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall consist of the 
     whole of the following parishes in the State: St. Mary, 
     Iberia, St. Martin, St. Landry, Avoyelles, Pointe Coupee, 
     Iberville, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafayette, West Baton 
     Rouge, Concordia, and East Baton Rouge.
       (c) Local Coordinating Entity.--
       (1) In general.--The Atchafalaya Trace Commission shall be 
     the local coordinating entity for the Heritage Area.
       (2) Composition.--The local coordinating entity shall be 
     composed of 13 members appointed by the governing authority 
     of each parish within the Heritage Area.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORITIES AND DUTIES OF THE LOCAL COORDINATING 
                   ENTITY.

       (a) Authorities.--For the purposes of developing and 
     implementing the management plan and otherwise carrying out 
     this Act, the local coordinating entity may--
       (1) make grants to, and enter into cooperative agreements 
     with, the State, units of local government, and private 
     organizations;
       (2) hire and compensate staff; and
       (3) enter into contracts for goods and services.
       (b) Duties.--The local coordinating entity shall--
       (1) submit to the Secretary for approval a management plan;
       (2) implement the management plan, including providing 
     assistance to units of government and others in--
       (A) carrying out programs that recognize important resource 
     values within the Heritage Area;
       (B) encouraging sustainable economic development within the 
     Heritage Area;
       (C) establishing and maintaining interpretive sites within 
     the Heritage Area; and
       (D) increasing public awareness of, and appreciation for 
     the natural, historic, and cultural resources of, the 
     Heritage Area;
       (3) adopt bylaws governing the conduct of the local 
     coordinating entity; and
       (4) for any year for which Federal funds are received under 
     this Act, submit to the Secretary a report that describes, 
     for the year--
       (A) the accomplishments of the local coordinating entity; 
     and
       (B) the expenses and income of the local coordinating 
     entity.

[[Page 1022]]

       (c) Acquisition of Real Property.--The local coordinating 
     entity shall not use Federal funds received under this Act to 
     acquire real property or an interest in real property.
       (d) Public Meetings.--The local coordinating entity shall 
     conduct public meetings at least quarterly.

     SEC. 5. MANAGEMENT PLAN.

       (a) In General.--The local coordinating entity shall 
     develop a management plan for the Heritage Area that 
     incorporates an integrated and cooperative approach to 
     protect, interpret, and enhance the natural, scenic, 
     cultural, historic, and recreational resources of the 
     Heritage Area.
       (b) Consideration of Other Plans and Actions.--In 
     developing the management plan, the local coordinating entity 
     shall--
       (1) take into consideration State and local plans; and
       (2) invite the participation of residents, public agencies, 
     and private organizations in the Heritage Area.
       (c) Contents.--The management plan shall include--
       (1) an inventory of the resources in the Heritage Area, 
     including--
       (A) a list of property in the Heritage Area that--
       (i) relates to the purposes of the Heritage Area; and
       (ii) should be preserved, restored, managed, or maintained 
     because of the significance of the property; and
       (B) an assessment of cultural landscapes within the 
     Heritage Area;
       (2) provisions for the protection, interpretation, and 
     enjoyment of the resources of the Heritage Area consistent 
     with this Act;
       (3) an interpretation plan for the Heritage Area; and
       (4) a program for implementation of the management plan 
     that includes--
       (A) actions to be carried out by units of government, 
     private organizations, and public-private partnerships to 
     protect the resources of the Heritage Area; and
       (B) the identification of existing and potential sources of 
     funding for implementing the plan.
       (d) Submission to Secretary for Approval.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the local coordinating entity shall 
     submit the management plan to the Secretary for approval.
       (2) Effect of failure to submit.--If a management plan is 
     not submitted to the Secretary by the date specified in 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall not provide any additional 
     funding under this Act until a management plan for the 
     Heritage Area is submitted to the Secretary.
       (e) Approval.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after receiving the 
     management plan submitted under subsection (d)(1), the 
     Secretary, in consultation with the State, shall approve or 
     disapprove the management plan.
       (2) Action following disapproval.--
       (A) In general.--If the Secretary disapproves a management 
     plan under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall--
       (i) advise the local coordinating entity in writing of the 
     reasons for the disapproval;
       (ii) make recommendations for revisions to the management 
     plan; and
       (iii) allow the local coordinating entity to submit to the 
     Secretary revisions to the management plan.
       (B) Deadline for approval of revision.--Not later than 90 
     days after the date on which a revision is submitted under 
     subparagraph (A)(iii), the Secretary shall approve or 
     disapprove the revision.
       (f) Revision.--
       (1) In general.--After approval by the Secretary of a 
     management plan, the local coordinating entity shall 
     periodically--
       (A) review the management plan; and
       (B) submit to the Secretary, for review and approval by the 
     Secretary, the recommendations of the local coordinating 
     entity for any revisions to the management plan that the 
     local coordinating entity considers to be appropriate.
       (2) Expenditure of funds.--No funds made available under 
     this title shall be used to implement any revision proposed 
     by the local coordinating entity under paragraph (1)(B) until 
     the Secretary approves the revision.

     SEC. 6. REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.

       (a) Notification and Consent of Property Owners Required.--
     No privately owned property shall be preserved, conserved, or 
     promoted by the management plan for the Heritage Area until 
     the owner of that private property has been notified in 
     writing by the management entity and has given written 
     consent to the management entity for such preservation, 
     conservation, or promotion.
       (b) Landowner Withdraw.--Any owner of private property 
     included within the boundary of the Heritage Area shall have 
     that private property immediately removed from the boundary 
     by submitting a written request to the management entity.

     SEC. 7. PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION.

       (a) Access to Private Property.--Nothing in this Act shall 
     be construed to--
       (1) require any private property owner to allow public 
     access (including Federal, State, or local government access) 
     to such private property; or
       (2) modify any provision of Federal, State, or local law 
     with regard to public access to or use of private property.
       (b) Liability.--Designation of the Heritage Area shall not 
     be considered to create any liability, or to have any effect 
     on any liability under any other law, of any private property 
     owner with respect to any persons injured on that private 
     property.
       (c) Participation of Private Property Owners in Heritage 
     Area.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the 
     owner of any private property located within the boundaries 
     of the Heritage Area to participate in or be associated with 
     the Heritage Area.

     SEC. 8. EFFECT OF ACT.

       Nothing in this Act or in establishment of the Heritage 
     Area--
       (1) grants any Federal agency regulatory authority over any 
     interest in the Heritage Area, unless cooperatively agreed on 
     by all involved parties;
       (2) modifies, enlarges, or diminishes any authority of the 
     Federal Government or a State or local government to regulate 
     any use of land as provided for by law (including 
     regulations) in existence on the date of enactment of this 
     Act;
       (3) grants any power of zoning or land use to the local 
     coordinating entity;
       (4) imposes any environmental, occupational, safety, or 
     other rule, standard, or permitting process that is different 
     from those in effect on the date of enactment of this Act 
     that would be applicable had the Heritage Area not been 
     established;
       (5)(A) imposes any change in Federal environmental quality 
     standards; or
       (B) authorizes designation of any portion of the Heritage 
     Area that is subject to part C of title I of the Clean Air 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7470 et seq.) as class 1 for the purposes of 
     that part solely by reason of the establishment of the 
     Heritage Area;
       (6) authorizes any Federal or State agency to impose more 
     restrictive water use designations, or water quality 
     standards on uses of or discharges to, waters of the United 
     States or waters of the State within or adjacent to the 
     Heritage Area solely by reason of the establishment of the 
     Heritage Area;
       (7) abridges, restricts, or alters any applicable rule, 
     standard, or review procedure for permitting of facilities 
     within or adjacent to the Heritage Area; or
       (8) affects the continuing use and operation, where located 
     on the date of enactment of this Act, of any public utility 
     or common carrier.

     SEC. 9. REPORTS.

       For any year in which Federal funds have been made 
     available under this Act, the local coordinating entity shall 
     submit to the Secretary a report that describes--
       (1) the accomplishments of the local coordinating entity; 
     and
       (2) the expenses and income of the local coordinating 
     entity.

     SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act $10,000,000, of which not more than 
     $1,000,000 shall be made available for any fiscal year.
       (b) Cost-Sharing Requirement.--The Federal share of the 
     total cost of any activity assisted under this Act shall be 
     not more than 50 percent.

     SEC. 11. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.

       The authority of the Secretary to provide assistance to the 
     local coordinating entity under this Act terminates on the 
     date that is 15 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Vitter):
  S. 205. A bill to authorize the American Battle Monuments Commission 
to establish in the State of Louisiana a memorial to honor the Buffalo 
Soldiers; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, One Hundred and Thirty Nine years ago, 
before the term Homeland Security was even coined, a group of men 
devoted themselves to securing the frontiers of this Nation. They 
protected Americans in their homes; they deterred hostile invaders, and 
they secured the blessings of liberty for a young country. Even more 
remarkable, they secured these blessings for others, while they could 
not fully enjoy them themselves.
  I am referring to the Buffalo Soldiers. These brave men instituted a 
tradition of professional military service for African Americans that 
spans the greater part of American history. African American military 
service is as old as our nation. There were black soldiers during the 
revolution, a unit of free black men played a pivotal role in the 
Battle of New Orleans, and the exploits of African Americans during the 
Civil War have been captured in novels and on film. However, it was not 
until the Army Reorganization Act of 1866 that soldiering and service 
to country

[[Page 1023]]

became a realistic option for African Americans seeking to improve 
their quality of life. In so doing, they raised the bar of freedom, and 
revealed the injustice of preventing the defenders of democracy from 
fully participating in it.
  The City of New Orleans, and the State of Louisiana have a rich 
history. They have given more than their fair share of sons to the 
service of our Nation. Much of this history is commemorated throughout 
the State. Yet, these great sons of New Orleans remain unacknowledged 
in their home. For in Louisiana's great military tradition, surely one 
of its greatest military contributions were the 9th Cavalry Regiment 
and the 25th Infantry Regiment.
  These two forces, recruited and organized in New Orleans, represent 
half of all the units of buffalo soldiers. The 9th Cavalry alone 
constituted 10% of all the American cavalry. Their list of adversaries 
reads like a who's who of the Old West--Geronimo, Sitting Bull, Poncho 
Villa. In movies, when settlers encounter Apaches, the cavalry always 
comes to the rescue. Yet how many times were the cavalry that rode over 
the horizon African American? Of course, the reality is that the 
Buffalo Soldiers comprised some of our nations most capable and loyal 
troops. Despite suffering the worst deprivations known to any American 
soldiers of the period, they had the lowest desertion rates in the 
Army. The 9th Cavalry was awarded 10 Congressional Medals of Honor, 
including a native Louisianan, Sgt. Emanuel Stance--a farmer from 
Carroll Parish.
  For these reasons, I am offering legislation today along with Senator 
Vitter that would authorize the creation of a suitable memorial in New 
Orleans for these gallant soldiers. There is an excellent statue to the 
Buffalo Soldiers at Fort Leavenworth, KS. It commemorates the 10th 
Cavalry Regiment stationed there. However, I believe that these men 
deserve to be recognized in their home city. Furthermore, it should be 
in an a location where thousands of visitors will have the opportunity 
to come to appreciate the legacy of the Buffalo Soldiers. I believe 
that the City of New Orleans is the perfect location.
  We have made a number of changes to this legislation after 
consultations with the American Battle Monuments Commission. I believe 
these changes should address any concerns that they have expressed. 
Furthermore, we have an able and dedicated organization of individuals 
in the state who desperately want to see this project to completion. 
Last year, I had the pleasure of being in New Orleans with another of 
this Nation's great military heroes, Senator Daniel Inouye. We 
addressed a group of distinguished veterans from all around the state. 
Among them was George Jones, President of the Greater New Orleans 
Chapter of the Buffalo Soldiers Association. They have been working 
with Eddie Dixon, the artist for the beautiful Fort Leavenworth 
statute, to develop an appropriate memorial in the City of New Orleans 
for over a decade. This bill will fulfill that noble ambition.
  This Nation has sadly found the need to say thank you to its 
servicemen and women after the fact on more than one occasion. 
Unfortunately, this is another. We are fortunate to have living 
memories of the 9th and 10th Cavalry Regiments today. The regiments 
were not disbanded until the conclusion of World War Two, where they 
served with distinction. We should take this opportunity to honor these 
veterans, and in so doing, honor the principles of liberty, freedom and 
democracy for which they fought and sacrificed. They have given so much 
to their nation, we owe them this public expression of gratitude.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 205

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Buffalo Soldiers 
     Commemoration Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF BUFFALO SOLDIERS MEMORIAL.

       (a) Authorization.--The American Battle Monuments 
     Commission is authorized to establish a memorial to honor the 
     Buffalo Soldiers in or around the City of New Orleans on land 
     donated for such purpose or on Federal land with the consent 
     of the appropriate land manager.
       (b) Contributions.--The Commission shall solicit and accept 
     contributions for the construction and maintenance of the 
     memorial.
       (c) Cooperative Agreements.--The Commission may enter into 
     a cooperative agreement with a private or public entity for 
     the purpose of fundraising for the construction and 
     maintenance of the memorial.
       (d) Maintenance Agreement.--Prior to beginning construction 
     of the memorial, the Commission shall enter into an agreement 
     with an appropriate public or private entity to provide for 
     the permanent maintenance of the memorial and shall have 
     sufficient funds, or assurance that it will receive 
     sufficient funds, to complete the memorial.

     SEC. 3. BUFFALO SOLDIERS MEMORIAL ACCOUNT.

       (a) Establishment.--The Commission shall maintain an escrow 
     account (``account'') to pay expenses incurred in 
     constructing the memorial.
       (b) Deposits Into the Account.--The Commission shall 
     deposit into the account any principal and interest by the 
     United States that the Chairman determines has a suitable 
     maturity.
       (c) Use of Account.--Amounts in the account, including 
     proceeds of any investments, may be used to pay expenses 
     incurred in establishing the memorial. After construction of 
     the memorial amounts in the account shall be transferred by 
     the Commission to the entity providing for permanent 
     maintenance of the memorial under such terms and conditions 
     as the Commission determines will ensure the proper use and 
     accounting of the amounts.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. Craig, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. 
        Smith):
  S. 206. A bill to designate the Ice Age Floods National Geologic 
Trail, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Ice Age 
Floods National Geologic Trail Designation Act of 2005''. I am thankful 
that Senator Larry Craig of Idaho will again be the lead Republican 
cosponsor and pleased to also be joined by the Senior Senator from 
Washington, (Mrs. Murray), as well as Senator from Oregon, (Mr. Smith).
  Some 12,000 to 17,000 years ago, at the end of the Ice Age, a series 
of floods swept across the Pacific Northwest. These epic floods 
fundamentally changed the geography and way of life in the Pacific 
Northwest. The coulees, buttes, boulder fields, lakes, ridges and 
gravel bars they left behind still define the unique landscape of our 
State and our region today.
  Creating a National Park Service trail to recognize and celebrate how 
these floods literally shaped the face of our State will provide an 
unparalleled educational resource for Washingtonians and visitors from 
across the country. It will also spur economic development and create 
jobs in local communities across Eastern and Central Washington.
  I look forward to working with my other members of the Pacific 
Northwest congressional delegation, as well as my colleagues in the 
Senate, to ensure swift passage of this important legislation. I ask 
unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 206

       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 ``Ice Age Floods National 
     Geologic Trail Designation Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) at the end of the last Ice Age, some 12,000 to 17,000 
     years ago, a series of cataclysmic floods occurred in what is 
     now the northwest region of the United States, leaving a 
     lasting mark of dramatic and distinguishing features on the 
     landscape of parts of the States of Montana, Idaho, 
     Washington and Oregon;

[[Page 1024]]

       (2) geological features that have exceptional value and 
     quality to illustrate and interpret this extraordinary 
     natural phenomenon are present on Federal, State, tribal, 
     county, municipal, and private land in the region; and
       (3) in 2001, a joint study team headed by the National Park 
     Service that included about 70 members from public and 
     private entities completed a study endorsing the 
     establishment of an Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail--
       (A) to recognize the national significance of this 
     phenomenon; and
       (B) to coordinate public and private sector entities in the 
     presentation of the story of the Ice Age floods.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to designate the 
     Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail in the States of 
     Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon, enabling the public 
     to view, experience, and learn about the features and story 
     of the Ice Age floods through the collaborative efforts of 
     public and private entities.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Ice age floods; floods.--The term ``Ice Age floods'' or 
     ``floods'' means the cataclysmic floods that occurred in what 
     is now the northwestern United States during the last Ice Age 
     from massive, rapid and recurring drainage of Glacial Lake in 
     Missoula, Montana.
       (2) Plan.--The term ``plan'' means the cooperative 
     management and interpretation plan authorized under section 
     5(f).
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (4) Trail.--The term ``Trail'' means the Ice Age Floods 
     National Geologic Trail designated by section 4(a).

     SEC. 4. ICE AGE FLOODS NATIONAL GEOLOGIC TRAIL.

       (a) Designation.--In order to provide for public 
     appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment of the nationally 
     significant natural and cultural features of the Ice Age 
     floods and to promote collaborative efforts for 
     interpretation and education among public and private 
     entities located along the pathways of the floods, there is 
     designated the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail.
       (b) Location.--
       (1) Map.--The route of the Trail shall be generally 
     depicted on the map entitled ``Ice Age Floods National 
     Geologic Trail,'' numbered _____, and dated _____.
       (2) Route.--The route shall generally follow public roads 
     and highways--
       (A) from the vicinity of Missoula in western Montana;
       (B) across northern Idaho;
       (C) through eastern and southern sections of Washington;
       (D) across northern Oregon in the vicinity of the 
     Willamette Valley and the Columbia River; and
       (E) to the Pacific Ocean.
       (3) Revision.--The Secretary may revise the map by 
     publication in the Federal Register of a notice of 
     availability of a new map as part of the plan.
       (c) Map Availability.--Any map referred to in subsection 
     (b) shall be on file and available for public inspection in 
     the appropriate offices of the National Park Service.

     SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the Director 
     of the National Park Service, shall administer the Trail in 
     accordance with this Act.
       (b) Trail Management Office.--In order for the National 
     Park Service to manage the Trail and coordinate Trail 
     activities with other public agencies and private entities, 
     the Secretary may establish and operate a trail management 
     office within the vicinity of the Trail.
       (c) Land Acquisition.--
       (1) In general.--If the acquisition is consistent with the 
     plan, the Secretary may acquire land, in a quantity not to 
     exceed 25 acres, for administrative and public information 
     purposes to facilitate the geographic diversity of the Trail 
     throughout the States of Montana, Idaho, Washington, and 
     Oregon.
       (2) Methods.--
       (A) Private land.--Private land may be acquired from a 
     willing seller under this Act only by donation, purchase with 
     donated or appropriated funds, or exchange.
       (B) Non-federal public land.--Non-Federal public land may 
     be acquired from a willing seller under this Act--
       (i) only by donation or exchange; and
       (ii) after consultation with the affected unit of local 
     government.
       (d) Interpretive Facilities.--The Secretary may plan, 
     design, and construct interpretive facilities for sites 
     associated with the Trail if the facilities are constructed 
     in partnership with State, local, tribal, or non-profit 
     entities and are consistent with the plan.
       (e) Interagency Technical Committee.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     interagency technical committee to advise the trail 
     management office on the technical planning for the 
     development of the plan.
       (2) Composition.--The committee--
       (A) shall include--
       (i) representatives from Federal, State, local, and tribal 
     agencies with interests in the floods; and
       (ii) representatives from the Ice Age Floods Institute; and
       (B) may include private property owners, business owners, 
     and nonprofit organizations.
       (f) Management Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after funds are 
     made available to carry out this Act under section 6, the 
     Secretary shall prepare a cooperative management and 
     interpretation plan for the Trail.
       (2) Consultation.--The Secretary shall prepare the plan in 
     consultation with--
       (A) State, local, and tribal governments;
       (B) the Ice Age Floods Institute;
       (C) private property owners; and
       (D) other interested parties.
       (3) Contents.--The plan shall--
       (A) confirm and, if appropriate, expand on the inventory of 
     features of the floods contained in the National Park Service 
     study entitled ``Ice Age Floods, Study of Alternatives and 
     Environmental Assessment'' (February 2001) by--
       (i) locating features more accurately;
       (ii) improving the description of features; and
       (iii) reevaluating the features in terms of their 
     interpretive potential;
       (B) review and, if appropriate, modify the map of the Trail 
     referred to in section 4(b);
       (C) describe strategies for the coordinated development of 
     the Trail, including an interpretive plan for facilities, 
     waysides, roadside pullouts, exhibits, media, and programs 
     that present the story of the floods to the public 
     effectively; and
       (D) identify potential partnering opportunities in the 
     development of interpretive facilities and educational 
     programs to educate the public about the story of the floods.
       (g) Cooperative Management.--
       (1) In general.--In order to facilitate the development of 
     coordinated interpretation, education, resource stewardship, 
     visitor facility development and operation, and scientific 
     research associated with the Trail and to promote more 
     efficient administration of the sites associated with the 
     Trail, the Secretary may enter into cooperative management 
     agreements with appropriate officials in the States of 
     Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon in accordance with the 
     authority provided for units of the National Park System 
     under section 3(l) of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-2(l)).
       (2) Unit of national park system.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the Trail shall be considered a unit of the 
     National Park System.
       (h) Cooperative Agreements.--The Secretary may enter into 
     cooperative agreements with public or private entities to 
     carry out this Act.
       (i) Effect on Private Property Rights.--Nothing in this 
     Act--
       (1) requires any private property owner to allow public 
     access (including Federal, State, or local government access) 
     to private property; or
       (2) modifies any provision of Federal, State, or local law 
     with respect to public access to or use of private land.
       (j) Liability.--Designation of the Trail by section 4(a) 
     does not create any liability for, or affect any liability 
     under any law of, any private property owner with respect to 
     any person injured on the private property.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act, of which not more than 
     $500,000 may be used for each fiscal year for the 
     administration of the Trail.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Vitter):
  S. 207. A bill to adjust the boundary of the Barataria Preserve Unit 
of the Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve in the State 
of Louisiana, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I rise, along with Senator Vitter, 
to introduce the Jean Lafitte National Historic Park and Preserve 
Boundary Adjustment Act of 2005. This bill was passed unanimously by 
the Senate during the 108th Congress.
  The Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve was 
established in 1978 to preserve for present and future generations 
significant examples of the rich natural and cultural resources of 
Louisiana's Mississippi delta region. The park seeks to illustrate the 
influence of environment and history on the development of a unique 
regional culture. It is named for Jean Lafitte who was a pirate, or 
privateer as he like to be called, that fought alongside U.S. forces in 
the Battle of New Orleans at the end of the War of 1812. The park 
consists of six physically separate sites and a park headquarters 
located in New Orleans. The sites in Lafayette, Thibodaux and Eunice 
interpret the Acadian culture of the area. The Barataria Preserve, in 
Marrero, interprets the natural and cultural history

[[Page 1025]]

of the uplands, swamps and marshlands of the region. Six miles 
southeast of New Orleans is the Chalmette Battlefield and National 
Cemetery, site of the 1815 Battle of New Orleans and the final resting 
place for soldiers from the Civil War, Spanish-American War, World Wars 
I and II and Vietnam. The park's visitor center, which is located in 
the historic French Quarter, interprets the history of New Orleans and 
diverse cultures of Mississippi delta region.
  It is the Barataria site that is the focus of our attention today. 
The Bill before us would merely adjust the boundary of the Barataria 
preserve unit of Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve and 
by doing so protect a crucial component of one of the largest and most 
productive expanses of coastal wetlands in North America--coastal 
Louisiana or as they are known: America's Wetlands. The Barataria 
preserve is the only part of our coastal wetlands preserved in the 
National Park System. As we strive to find ways to stem the tide of 
coastal erosion in Louisiana, and bring about the restoration of 
wetlands already lost, it is equally important that we protect those 
areas that remain such as the Barataria preserve so that Americans can 
experience, first hand, the amazing beauty and fertility of Louisiana's 
bountiful coastal wetlands--the most threatened wetland ecosystem in 
the country--disappearing at a rate of 25 to 35 square miles a year. 
Located on the outskirts of New Orleans, where it is accessible not 
only to the people of New Orleans but also to the millions of tourists 
from around the world that visit New Orleans and south Louisiana, 
Barataria serves as an interpretive experience of this greatest of 
coastal wetlands.
  This bill expands this national treasure without any cost to the 
Federal Government while preserving private property rights. It simply 
transfers to the Park over 3,000 acres of wetlands already in Federal 
ownership, already paid for by the American people. These lands, which 
are adjacent to the Preserve, became Federal as a result of the 
settlement by the Justice Department of two lawsuits brought by the 
landowners against Federal agencies. However, because these acres are 
not managed by the park, they are presently unavailable for public use. 
An Act of Congress is necessary to allow inclusion of these lands into 
a new boundary.
  My bill does just that, opening these lands for canoeing, wildlife 
viewing, exploration, fishing, and hunting, all under the management 
and protection of the park service. The bill grants long-term 
protection to crucial resources that the Park Service has found 
suitable and feasible for inclusion within a new boundary through a 
1996 boundary study.
  The Park is immediately adjacent to the developed areas of the 
Westbank of Jefferson Parish along much of its boundary while the 
Barataria unit in particular is right next door to a hurricane levee. 
Making more of the park boundary contiguous with the levee that divides 
developed land from undeveloped wetlands enhances opportunities for 
direct cooperation between these communities and the Park for 
management of shared concerns. These concerns include the routing of 
storm-water run-off; the discharge of treated sewage; estuarine water 
quality and its effects on fisheries and recreational uses; wetland 
restoration and mitigation; and a number of other problems and 
opportunities. The Park has worked with Jefferson Parish in seeking 
creative solutions to these problems and will continue to do so. The 
addition of these properties will only enhance their chances for 
success.
  It is for all of these reasons that I am hopeful the Senate can 
approve of this measure in the near future. The expansion we seek in 
this Bill benefits us today as well as tomorrow.
  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. 207

       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 ``Jean Lafitte National 
     Historical Park and Preserve Boundary Adjustment Act of 
     2005''.

     SEC. 2. JEAN LAFITTE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK AND PRESERVE 
                   BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.

       (a) In General.--Section 901 of the National Parks and 
     Recreation Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 230) is amended in the 
     second sentence by striking ``twenty thousand acres generally 
     depicted on the map entitled `Barataria Marsh Unit-Jean 
     Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve' numbered 
     90,000B and dated April 1978,'' and inserting ``23,000 acres 
     generally depicted on the map entitled `Boundary Map, 
     Barataria Preserve Unit, Jean Lafitte National Historical 
     Park and Preserve', numbered 467/80100, and dated August 
     2002,''.
       (b) Acquisition of Land.--Section 902 of the National Parks 
     and Recreation Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 230a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``(a) Within the'' and all that follows 
     through the first sentence and inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Barataria preserve unit.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary may acquire any land, 
     water, and interests in land and water within the boundary of 
     the Barataria Preserve Unit, as depicted on the map described 
     in section 901, by donation, purchase with donated or 
     appropriated funds, transfer from any other Federal agency, 
     or exchange.
       ``(B) Limitations.--
       ``(i) In general.--With respect to the areas on the map 
     identified as `Bayou aux Carpes Addition' and `CIT Tract 
     Addition'--

       ``(I) any Federal land acquired in the areas shall be 
     transferred without consideration to the administrative 
     jurisdiction of the National Park Service; and
       ``(II) any private land in the areas may be acquired by the 
     Secretary only with the consent of the owner of the land.

       ``(ii) Easements.--Any Federal land in the area identified 
     on the map as `CIT Tract Addition' that is transferred under 
     clause (i)(I) shall be subject to any easements that have 
     been agreed to by the Secretary and the Secretary of the 
     Army.'';
       (B) in the second sentence, by striking ``The Secretary may 
     also'' and inserting the following:
       ``(2) French quarter.--The Secretary may'';
       (C) in the third sentence, by striking ``Lands, waters, and 
     interests therein'' and inserting the following:
       ``(3) Acquisition of state land.--Land, water, and 
     interests in land and water''; and
       (D) in the fourth sentence, by striking ``In acquiring'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(4) Acquisition of oil and gas rights.--In acquiring'';
       (2) by striking subsections (b) through (f) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(b) Resource Protection.--With respect to the land, 
     water, and interests in land and water of the Barataria 
     Preserve Unit, the Secretary shall preserve and protect--
       ``(1) fresh water drainage patterns;
       ``(2) vegetative cover;
       ``(3) the integrity of ecological and biological systems; 
     and
       ``(4) water and air quality.''; and
       (3) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (c).
       (c) Hunting, Fishing, and Trapping.--Section 905 of the 
     National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 230d) is 
     amended in the first sentence by striking ``within the core 
     area and on those lands acquired by the Secretary pursuant to 
     section 902(c) of this title, he'' and inserting ``the 
     Secretary''.
       (d) Administration.--Section 906 of the National Parks and 
     Recreation Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 230e) is amended--
       (1) by striking the first sentence; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``Pending such 
     establishment and thereafter the'' and inserting ``The''.

     SEC. 3. REFERENCES IN LAW.

       (a) In General.--Any reference in a law (including 
     regulations), map, document, paper, or other record of the 
     United States--
       (1) to the Barataria Marsh Unit shall be considered to be a 
     reference to the Barataria Preserve Unit; or
       (2) to the Jean Lafitte National Historical Park shall be 
     considered to be a reference to the Jean Lafitte National 
     Historical Park and Preserve.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Title IX of the National Parks 
     and Recreation Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 230 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``Barataria Marsh Unit'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``Barataria Preserve Unit''; and
       (2) by striking ``Jean Lafitte National Historical Park'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``Jean Lafitte National 
     Historical Park and Preserve''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEVIN (for himself, Mr. DeWine, Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. 
        Voinovich):
  S. 208. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
direct the Great Lakes National Program Office of the Environmental 
Protection

[[Page 1026]]

Agency to develop, implement, monitor, and report on a series of 
indicators of water quality and related environmental factors in the 
Great Lakes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, my colleagues Senators DeWine and Voinovich 
of Ohio, Senator Stabenow of Michigan, and I are pleased to introduce 
the Great Lakes Water Quality Indicators and Monitoring Act. The bill 
directs the Environmental Protection Agency to develop indicators of 
Great Lakes water quality and related environmental factors and a 
comprehensive network to monitor those indicators. This bill will 
result in science-based assessments of the health of the Great Lakes.
  The Great Lakes are a treasured natural resource. The Great Lakes 
contain almost 20% of the world's fresh water, and millions of people 
in the Great Lakes basin rely on the lakes for drinking water, for 
economic livelihoods such as fishing and shipping, and for recreational 
opportunities, including swimming and boating. Unfortunately, the Great 
Lakes have suffered from decades of toxic discharges, urban and 
agricultural runoff, and other environmental challenges. We've made 
some progress in improving water quality, but we know we have a long 
way to go.
  The stewards of the lakes--at the Federal, State, and local levels--
use a variety of methods to determine the health of the Great Lakes and 
whether they are improving. For example, the EPA and the Fish and 
Wildlife Service monitor the accumulation of chemicals in Great Lakes 
fish. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration detects 
changes in the ecosystem from space-based satellites and waterborne 
buoys. The U.S. Geological Survey samples stream flow and quality, and 
the States inspect for compliance with water quality standards. These 
efforts to collect scientific data are largely voluntary and suffer 
from a lack of funding and coordination. Additionally, they use 
inconsistent methods that often produce incompatible results.
  In 2004, the General Accounting Office released a report entitled 
Great Lakes: An Overall Strategy and Indicators for Measuring Progress 
are Needed to Better Achieve Restoration Goals. The GAO looked at 
almost 200 Federal and State programs and found that a lack of 
coordination, poorly defined goals, and insufficient data make it 
difficult to evaluate the success of these programs. The GAO found that 
there are no data collected regularly throughout the Great Lakes, and 
that the existing data are inadequate to determine whether water 
quality and other environmental conditions are improving.
  In 1990, I authored the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act, which 
strengthened the water quality standards in the Great Lakes region. In 
2002, Congress passed the Great Lakes Legacy Act, to speed the cleanup 
of contaminated bottom sediment. Today, we need to establish a way to 
evaluate the impact of these and similar measures. To show results, we 
need science-based indicators of water quality and related 
environmental factors, and we need to monitor those indicators 
regularly throughout the ecosystem.
  GAO recommends that EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office lead an 
effort to develop indicators and a monitoring network. Our bill gives 
that office the mandate to work with other Federal agencies and Canada 
to identify and measure water quality and other environmental factors 
on a regular basis. The initial set of data collected through this 
network will serve as a benchmark against which to measure future 
improvements. Those measurements will help us make decisions on how to 
steer future restoration efforts. With a clear picture of how the Great 
Lakes are changing, we can change course when needed and spend public 
funds on the most effective measures to meet the most pressing demands.
  This bill serves a second purpose--it provides EPA with dedicated 
funding to make sure that data collection can begin in a timely manner 
and be carried out consistently and comprehensively.
  I encourage my colleagues to support this bill and help speed its 
passage.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Biden, and Mr. Hagel):
  S. 209. A bill to build operational readiness in civilian agencies, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am re-introducing today a bill that was 
on the legislative calendar of the 108th Congress when it adjourned in 
December. The Stabilization and Reconstruction Civilian Management Act 
is intended to build operational readiness in the civilian agencies to 
improve our nation's capacity to carry out post-conflict stabilization 
and reconstruction missions.
  Until very recently, the concept of ``nation building'' was 
considered to be pejorative by many Members of Congress and government 
officials. The foreign policy orthodoxy of both parties was skeptical 
of missions that entailed long-term peacekeeping or stabilization 
commitments. If military force was necessary, most policymakers 
believed it should be used only for relatively brief periods followed 
by rapid withdrawal.
  But experience has taught us that this approach rarely can be 
accommodated if we are serious about protecting our own security in an 
age of terrorism. We have seen how terrorists can exploit nations 
afflicted by lawlessness and desperate circumstances. They seek out 
such places to establish training camps, recruit new members, and tap 
into a global black market in weapons technology. If we are to deny 
sanctuaries to terrorists, we must be involved in post-conflict 
stabilization.
  With this in mind, the Foreign Relations Committee took up the issue 
of how best to organize and prepare for post-conflict missions. Well 
over a year ago, we held our first bipartisan roundtable that brought 
together some of the best minds from inside and outside of government 
to consider this issue. From this process, we developed the 
Stabilization and Reconstruction Civilian Management Act of 2004. I 
introduced this legislation with Senators Biden and Hagel, and the 
Committee passed it unanimously. The purpose of our bill is to 
establish a more robust civilian capability to respond quickly and 
effectively to post-conflict situations or other complex emergencies. 
The bill puts the State Department at the center of the civilian 
reconstruction and stabilization effort, while coordination between 
State and Defense would continue at the NSC level.
  The Defense Science Board (DSB), which recently recommended a similar 
strengthening of stabilization and reconstruction capacity in the 
Defense Department, endorsed our legislation. On January 26, I 
introduced S. 192, new legislation that took the DSB recommendations 
and provided the executive branch the necessary authorities to carry 
them out. It calls upon the Secretary of Defense to take immediate 
action to strengthen the role and capabilities of the Department of 
Defense for carrying out stabilization and reconstruction activities as 
well as to support the development of core competencies in other 
departments and agencies, principally the Department of State. The bill 
has been referred to the Senate Armed Service Committee for that 
Committee's consideration.
  While recognizing the critical challenges that our military has 
undertaken with skill and courage in both Afghanistan and Iraq, we must 
acknowledge that certain non-security missions will be better served in 
the future by a more organized civilian response. Our post-conflict 
efforts frequently have had a higher than necessary military profile. 
This is not the result of a Pentagon power grab or institutional 
fights. Rather, the military has led post-conflict operations primarily 
because it is the only agency capable of mobilizing sufficient 
personnel and resources for these tasks. As a consequence, military 
resources have been stretched and deployments of military personnel 
have been extended beyond expectations. If we can improve the 
capabilities of the civilian agencies, they can take over many of the 
non-security missions that have burdened the military.

[[Page 1027]]

  In re-introducing the Stabilization and Reconstruction Civilian 
Management Act'' in the 109th Congress, I am well aware of the impact 
it has already had on both the debate on this issue and developments to 
date. In fact, some initiatives contained in the legislation have moved 
forward without its having been enacted. My Senate colleagues on the 
Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee agreed with the need to 
provide an emergency conflict response fund for stabilization and 
reconstruction crises. And the Commerce, Justice, State appropriators 
in both the Senate and the House agreed with the need to establish a 
new office at the State Department to take the lead in organizing our 
civilian efforts. Indeed, an Office of Reconstruction and Stabilization 
has now been organized and a highly capable coordinator named. At her 
confirmation hearings, Dr. Rice demonstrated detailed knowledge of the 
Office and its work. I am confidant that she has already embraced the 
Department's role as a core mission and will work to support the Office 
with appropriate funding and the kind of Department-wide backing and 
support from management that it will need to do its job.
  So why continue to pursue the legislation? It is still important to 
seek enactment because the legislation provides a permanent basis in 
law for the established office as well as new authorities that the 
Department will need to be successful.
  The Bush Administration's action on this issue demonstrates its 
ability to recalibrate policy and organization to address a changing 
world. We know that the President will continue to provide leadership 
in organizing the U.S. government for this mission. As demonstrated by 
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote of 19-0, and by actions 
taken by the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, 
State and the Judiciary and the Senate Subcommittee on Foreign 
Operations, there is significant support in the Congress for his work 
and for the foresight he is already demonstrating.
  The new Office, headed by Carlos Pascual, is doing a government-wide 
inventory of the civilian assets that might be available for 
stabilization and reconstruction tasks. It is also pursuing an idea 
proposed in our bill of a Readiness Reserve to enable rapid 
mobilization of post-conflict stabilization personnel. It will work 
closely with the Secretary to assist in the coordination of policy, the 
preparation and management of response, and in developing cooperative 
arrangements with foreign countries, international and regional 
organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and private sector 
organizations.
  I am hopeful that the Office also will develop the concept of a 250-
person active duty Response Readiness Corps that is contained in the 
legislation. In Army terms, that is less than a small battalion of 
well-trained people--a modest but vigorous force-multiplier that would 
greatly improve our nation's stabilization capacity. This Corps would 
be composed of State Department and USAID employees who have the 
experience and technical skills to manage stabilization and 
reconstruction tasks in a hostile environment.
  Secretary Rice has been one of the most enthusiastic supporters of 
enhancing standing civilian capacity to respond to post conflict 
situations. In answer to one of my questions during the confirmation 
process, she said: ``Creating a strong U.S. Government stabilization 
and reconstruction capacity is an Administration national security 
priority.''
  She asserted that ``experience has shown that we must have the 
capacity to manage 2 to 3 stabilization and reconstruction operations 
concurrently. That means [we need] staff in Washington and in the field 
to manage and deliver quality programs.''
  Dr. Rice is prepared to make the State Department an effective inter-
agency leader as it should be--in post-conflict operations. I look 
forward to working closely with her on this effort. I consider this new 
mission to be one of the most important long-term defenses that the 
State Department can mount against future acts of terrorism.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, 
        Mr. Burr, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Hagel, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Lugar, Mr. 
        Nelson of Florida, Mr. Coleman, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Levin, Ms. 
        Landrieu, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Inouye, and 
        Mr. Bennett):
  S. 211. A bill to facilitate nationwide availability of 2-1-1 
telephone service for information and referral on human services, 
volunteer services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the calling 
for a 2-1-1 Act with my colleague Senator Elizabeth Dole. This bill 
will make an invaluable difference for the citizens of New York and the 
country.
  Just last week I was in Rochester helping to launch a 2-1-1 call 
center that will serve the citizens of the Finger Lakes region of New 
York. This call center will provide a simple, efficient, and convenient 
way for individuals to obtain vital information about government 
services. It is the first step in an ambitious plan to provide 365 day, 
24 hour 2-1-1 service throughout all of New York, and ultimately, the 
entire country.
  The Calling for 2-1-1 Act, which I am introducing today, will create 
at least one 2-1-1 call center just like the one in Rochester in every 
state in the country, and will link every regional call center together 
to ensure Statewide coverage. Last Congress, 31 members of the Senate 
and 149 members of the House of Representatives co-sponsored the 
Calling for 2-1-1 Act. In the 109th, we are working to appeal to even 
more.
  The best part of the 2-1-1 system is that it is equally available to 
everyone. From the mother whose child is about to go off to war, to the 
veteran returning from service, 2-1-1 will help people access the 
information they need when they need it. It helps teens who are in 
crisis and young mothers who have nowhere else to turn. Single mothers 
trying to find a job in a tough economy, frail senior citizens who need 
help with transportation but have no family or friends to call, and 
substance-abusing teens who in a moment of lucidity decide to seek a 
way out can all find what they need by dialing 2-1-1.
  This number also helps people who want to give back to their 
communities. 2-1-1 provides lots of information about volunteer 
opportunities and helps direct people who want to give donations. At 
times of disaster, like the recent tsunami, 2-1-1 will be there to help 
get everyone the information they need to make sure their donations are 
directed effectively.
  2-1-1 is not only good for New Yorkers; it is also good for our 
Nation's bottom line. 2-1-1 saves money because it eliminates 
duplicative services. The service will replace the existing maze of 
individual numbers for individual services: hotlines for shelter from 
abusive spouses, vaccinations for children, or information about where 
to obtain hospice services for ailing parents or loved ones. 2-1-1 will 
be a ``one-stop shop'' for all of these services. According to a recent 
study by the Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources at 
the University of Texas' Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, 2-
1-1 call centers can save as much as $130 million in the first year of 
operation and as much as $1.1 billion over ten years.
  I would add that 2-1-1 saves lives. Every time someone calls 9-1-1 
with a non-emergency call, the operators spend time with that caller 
that they could be spending dealing with a true emergency. 2-1-1 will 
replace 9-1-1 as the non-emergency point of reference because it is so 
easy to recall.
  We learned on September 11th how important 2-1-1 can be. In the 
immediate aftermath of the disaster, most people did not know where to 
turn for information about their loved ones. Fortunately for those who 
knew about it, 2-1-1 was already operating in Connecticut during 
September 11th, and it was critical in helping identify the

[[Page 1028]]

whereabouts of victims, connecting frightened children with their 
parents, providing information on terrorist suspects, and linking ready 
volunteers with coordinated efforts and victims with necessary mental 
and physical health services. 2-1-1 provided locations of vigils and 
support groups, and information on bioterrorism for those concerned 
about future attacks.
  As time went by, many people needed help getting back on their feet. 
More than 100,000 people lost their jobs. Close to 2,000 families 
applied for housing assistance because they couldn't pay their rent or 
mortgage. 90,000 people developed symptoms of post-traumatic stress 
disorder or clinical depression within eight weeks of the attacks. 
Another 34,000 people met the criteria for both diagnoses. And 2-1-1 
was there to help in Connecticut.
  It wasn't available in far too many other areas, however. In fact, a 
Brookings Institution and Urban Institute study of the aftermath of 
September 11th found that many dislocated workers struggled to obtain 
available assistance. People ``found it difficult to connect with 
resources due to a social-services infrastructure that does not support 
a simple and efficient method for people to learn about and access 
services and for agencies to coordinate their activities.''
  And that is what 2-1-1 is all about. It provides a single, efficient, 
coordinated way for people who need help to connect with those who can 
provide it.
  The Federal Communications Commission laid the groundwork for a 2-1-1 
number in 2000 when it directed that telephone number to be reserved 
for information and referral to social and human-services agencies. The 
2-1-1 system opens the way to a user-friendly social-services network, 
by providing an easy-to-remember and universally available phone number 
that links individuals and families in need to the appropriate non-
profit and government agencies.
  In Rochester, New York and throughout the Finger Lakes, 2-1-1 will do 
just that. Whatever the need, 2-1-1 can help point you in the right 
direction. That is why I am so pleased to be introducing this 
legislation today, and why I am so optimistic that this will be an 
important first step in the road to bringing 2-1-1 to communities 
throughout the Empire State and the entire U.S.A. Thank you.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 212. A bill to amend the Valles Caldera Preservation Act to 
improve the preservation of the Valles Caldera, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, in 2000 Congress established the Valles 
Caldera National Preserve, which is composed of approximately 89,000 
acres of spectacular land in northern New Mexico. The Preserve was 
created to protect and preserve the region's values and to provide the 
public with opportunities for the multiple use and sustained yield of 
its resources.
  Over the past 5 years, we have become aware of some simple changes in 
Federal policy that can be made to allow the Valles Caldera Trust and 
U.S. Forest Service to better address the issues facing the Valles 
Caldera Preserve. The bill that Senator Bingaman and I introduce today 
recognizes the need for those policy changes.
  The bill does the following: (1) Eliminates the ``willing seller 
basis'' so the Secretary of Agriculture can purchase the outstanding 
mineral interests of the Valles Caldera; (2) requires the Valles 
Caldera Trust to better manage its obligations and expenditures; (3) 
expands the category of people who can solicit and accept donations on 
the Trust's behalf; (4) allows monies received from claims relating to 
the Preserve to be used for costs incurred by the Trust; (5) provides a 
rate of compensation for the chairman of the Trust; (6) authorizes the 
Trust to dispose of marketable renewable resources; and (7) requires 
the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a fire safety plan for the 
Preserve.
  These are not vast changes; nor should they be controversial. They 
will, however, make an important difference to one of New Mexico's most 
pristine wilderness areas that is appreciated by New Mexico's visitors 
and natives alike.
  Because of the difference this legislation will make in New Mexico, I 
hope my colleagues will join with Senator Bingaman and me in approving 
the Valles Caldera Preservation Act of 2005.
  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. 212

       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 ``Valles Caldera Preservation 
     Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE VALLES CALDERA PRESERVATION ACT.

       (a) Acquisition of Outstanding Mineral Interests.--Section 
     104(e) of the Valles Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 
     698v-2(e)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``The acquisition'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--The acquisition'';
       (2) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Acquisition.--The Secretary'';
       (3) by striking ``on a willing seller basis'';
       (4) by striking ``Any such'' and inserting the following:
       ``(3) Administration.--Any such''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Available funds.--Any such interests shall be 
     acquired with available funds.
       ``(5) Declaration of taking.--
       ``(A) In general.--If negotiations to acquire the interests 
     are unsuccessful by the date that is 60 days after the date 
     of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall acquire 
     the interests pursuant to section 3114 of title 40, United 
     States Code.
       ``(B) Source of funds.--Any difference between the sum of 
     money estimated to be just compensation by the Secretary and 
     the amount awarded shall be paid from the permanent judgment 
     appropriation under section 1304 of title 31, United States 
     Code.''.
       (b) Obligations and Expenditures.--Section 106(e) of the 
     Valles Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-4(e)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Obligations and expenditures.--Subject to the laws 
     applicable to Government corporations, the Trust shall 
     determine--
       ``(A) the character of, and the necessity for, any 
     obligations and expenditures of the Trust; and
       ``(B) the manner in which obligations and expenditures 
     shall be incurred, allowed, and paid.''.
       (c) Solicitation of Donations.--Section 106(g) of the 
     Valles Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-4(g)) is 
     amended by striking ``The Trust may solicit'' and inserting 
     ``The members of the Board of Trustees, the executive 
     director, and 1 additional employee of the Trust in an 
     executive position designated by the Board of Trustees or the 
     executive director may solicit''.
       (d) Use of Proceeds.--Section 106(h)(1) of the Valles 
     Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-4(h)(1)) is amended 
     by striking ``subsection (g)'' and inserting ``subsection 
     (g), from claims, judgments, or settlements arising from 
     activities occurring on the Baca Ranch or the Preserve after 
     October 27, 1999,''.

     SEC. 3. BOARD OF TRUSTEES.

       Section 107(e) of the Valles Caldera Preservation Act 
     (U.S.C. 698v-5(e)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Trustees'' and 
     inserting ``Except as provided in paragraph (3), trustees''; 
     and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``Trustees'' and inserting the following:
       ``(A) Selection.--Trustees''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Compensation.--On request of the chair, the chair may 
     be compensated at a rate determined by the Board of Trustees, 
     but not to exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of 
     pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 
     of title 5, United States Code, for each day (including 
     travel time) in which the chair is engaged in the performance 
     of duties of the Board of Trustees.
       ``(C) Maximum rate of pay.--The total amount of 
     compensation paid to the chair for a fiscal year under 
     subparagraph (B) shall not exceed 25 percent of the annual 
     rate of pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule under 
     section 5315 of title 5, United States Code.''.

     SEC. 4. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Property Disposal Limitations.--Section 108(c)(3) of 
     the Valles Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-6(c)(3)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``The Trust may not 
     dispose'' and inserting the following:
       ``(A) In general.--The Trust may not dispose'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``The Trust'' and 
     inserting the following:

[[Page 1029]]

       ``(B) Maximum duration.--The Trust'';
       (3) in the last sentence, by striking ``Any such'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(C) Termination.--The''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Exclusions.--For the purposes of this paragraph, the 
     disposal of real property does not include the sale or other 
     disposal of forage, forest products, or marketable renewable 
     resources.''.
       (b) Law Enforcement and Fire Management.--Section 108(g) of 
     the Valles Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-6(g)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``The Secretary'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Law enforcement.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``The Trust'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(B) Federal agency.--The Trust''; and
       (3) by striking ``At the request of the Trust'' and all 
     that follows through the end of the paragraph and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(2) Fire management.--
       ``(A) Non-reimbursable services.--
       ``(i) Development of plan.--The Secretary shall, in 
     consultation with the Trust, develop a plan to carry out fire 
     preparedness, suppression, and emergency rehabilitation 
     services on the Preserve.
       ``(ii) Consistency with management program.--The plan shall 
     be consistent with the management program developed pursuant 
     to subsection (d).
       ``(iii) Cooperative agreement.--To the extent generally 
     authorized at other units of the National Forest System, the 
     Secretary shall provide the services to be carried out 
     pursuant to the plan under a cooperative agreement entered 
     into between the Secretary and the Trust.
       ``(B) Reimbursable services.--To the extent generally 
     authorized at other units of the National Forest System, the 
     Secretary may provide presuppression and nonemergency 
     rehabilitation and restoration services for the Trust at any 
     time on a reimbursable basis.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 213. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey 
certain Federal land to Rio Arriba County, New Mexico; to the Committee 
on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself and 
Senator Domenici to introduce legislation to allow a transfer of land 
to Rio Arriba County, NM from the Bureau of Land Management. The land 
is needed for County facilities, a cemetery for a local parish, and a 
new public school.
  Rio Arriba County is in a difficult position; the needs of the 
rapidly increasing area population continue to increase but there is 
precious little land available to the County where they can locate 
necessary facilities. Fortunately, the County has worked with the BLM 
to find a parcel of land that each agrees will best serve the interests 
of the public if it is transferred to County ownership. Indeed, I am 
told that BLM would likely have handled this transfer administratively 
if they were not barred from doing so by the particular history of how 
this parcel came into federal ownership. I am unaware of any opposition 
to the transfer.
  This bill will simply change the legal framework for the parcel so 
that the transfer can take place. I hope the Senate can act on this 
bill as quickly as possible so that Rio Arriba County can move forward 
to meet the pressing needs of the people there.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 213

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Rio Arriba County Land 
     Conveyance Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) County.--The term ``County'' means the County of Rio 
     Arriba, New Mexico.
       (2) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Alcalde 
     Proposed Land Transfer'' and dated September 23, 2004.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO RIO ARRIBA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (c), not later than 
     1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     shall convey to the County, all right, title, and interest of 
     the United States in and to the land (including any 
     improvements to the land) described in subsection (b).
       (b) Description of Land.--The land referred to in 
     subsection (a) consists of approximately 150.86 acres of land 
     located on the Sebastian Martin Land Grant in the vicinity of 
     Alcalde, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, as depicted on the 
     map.
       (c) Conditions.--
       (1) In general.--The land conveyed under subsection (a) 
     shall be treated as public land for the purposes of the Act 
     of June 14, 1926 (commonly known as the ``Recreation and 
     Public Purposes Act'') (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.)
       (2) Consideration.--The amount of consideration for the 
     conveyance of land under subsection (a) shall be determined 
     by the Secretary consistent with section 2(a) of the Act of 
     June 14, 1926 (commonly known as the ``Recreation and Public 
     Purposes Act'') (43 U.S.C. 869-1(a)).
       (3) Agreement.--Before conveying the land under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the 
     County that indemnifies the United States from all liability 
     of the United States arising from the land conveyed.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Domenici, and Mr. Kyl):
  S. 214. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
cooperate with the States on the border with Mexico and other 
appropriate entities in conducting a hydrogeologic characterization, 
mapping, and modeling program for priority transboundary aquifers, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, on behalf of myself, Senator Domenici 
and Senator Kyl, I am pleased today to introduce the United States-
Mexico Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Act. This legislation is 
intended to address the significant challenges concerning water 
resources that exist along the U.S-Mexico border. Recognizing the 
importance of these issues to the States making up that border, New 
Mexico, Arizona, Texas, and California, the Senate passed this bill 
twice during the 108th Congress. With strong bipartisan, and now 
bicameral support, I hope we can act quickly to pass it once again so 
that it can be enacted into law at the earliest opportunity.
  The genesis of this bill is a field hearing I conducted over three 
years ago during my tenure as the Chairman of the Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee. The focus of that hearing was water resource 
issues developing along the U.S.-Mexico border. In particular, I was 
concerned that issues regarding the availability of future water 
supplies were growing, and could lead to conflict in the region. The 
testimony at that hearing made clear that consensus is lacking on how 
communities in the border region will address their future water needs. 
Most significant, I was struck by the lack of agreement on the long-
term viability of future groundwater sources, many of which involve 
aquifers underlying both the United States and Mexico. Given the rapid 
population growth along the border, and the corresponding increase in 
demand for potable water, there is a strong need to gain a common and 
detailed understanding of our shared groundwater resources. A science-
based understanding of the resource is the first step to avoid 
conflicts similar to the one arising in south Texas over Rio Grande 
water deliveries under the 1944 U.S.-Mexico treaty.
  The United States-Mexico Trans-boundary Assessment Act is intended to 
address the lack of a binational consensus regarding water supplies 
along the border. It will do this by establishing a scientific program, 
involving the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Resources Research 
Institutes, and appropriate authorities and other entities on both 
sides of the border, to comprehensively assess priority trans-
boundary aquifers. Ultimately, the information and scientific tools 
developed under the program will be extremely valuable to State and 
local water resource managers in the border region. Of particular note, 
the analysis will include a search for new sources of water such as 
saline aquifers. Continued development of desalination technologies may 
lead to significant use of this untapped resource in the near future.
  I understand that establishing this scientific program and accurately 
assessing our shared water resources is just a step towards developing 
the long-term plans and solutions that will

[[Page 1030]]

help avoid future international disputes concerning scare water 
supplies. This small step, however, is an important one, and one with 
broad policy support. In its 6th Report on the U.S.-Mexico Border 
Environment, the Good Neighbor Environmental Board, an independent 
federal advisory committee managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, recommended the initiation of a ``border-wide groundwater 
assessment program to systematically analyze priority trans-boundary 
aquifers.'' Also, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 
in a January 2003 report of its U.S.-Mexico Binational Council, 
included as one of its recommendations that Mexico and the United 
States ``improve data collection, information gathering, and 
transparency as the first step to developing a long-term strategy for 
water management.''
  Ultimately, an effective long-term strategy will have to be developed 
by the communities and other water users who reside along the border. 
Working with each other and their State water resource agencies, I 
believe successful strategies can be developed so long as the 
information upon which those plans are based is the most accurate 
possible. In that respect, the USGS, along with its State-based 
partners, have a strong and important role to play. The resources and 
criteria provided by this legislation will ensure that these 
organizations can fulfill that role which, in turn, will enhance the 
prospects of our border communities to be able to plan for their future 
in a manner ensuring their long-term viability and prosperity.
  Thank you for the opportunity to make these remarks. I ask unanimous 
consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 214

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``United States-Mexico 
     Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Act''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to direct the Secretary of the 
     Interior to establish a United States-Mexico transboundary 
     aquifer assessment program to--
       (1) systematically assess priority transboundary aquifers; 
     and
       (2) provide the scientific foundation necessary for State 
     and local officials to address pressing water resource 
     challenges in the United States-Mexico border region.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Aquifer.--The term ``aquifer'' means a subsurface 
     water-bearing geologic formation from which significant 
     quantities of water may be extracted.
       (2) Border state.--The term ``Border State'' means each of 
     the States of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas.
       (3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' means an 
     Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or 
     community--
       (A) that is recognized as eligible for the special programs 
     and services provided by the United States to Indians because 
     of their status as Indians; and
       (B) the reservation of which includes a transboundary 
     aquifer within the exterior boundaries of the reservation.
       (4) Priority transboundary aquifer.--The term ``priority 
     transboundary aquifer'' means a transboundary aquifer that 
     has been designated for study and analysis under the program.
       (5) Program.--The term ``program'' means the United States-
     Mexico transboundary aquifer assessment program established 
     under section 4(a).
       (6) Reservation.--The term ``reservation'' means land that 
     has been set aside or that has been acknowledged as having 
     been set aside by the United States for the use of an Indian 
     tribe, the exterior boundaries of which are more particularly 
     defined in a final tribal treaty, agreement, executive order, 
     Federal statute, secretarial order, or judicial 
     determination.
       (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the United 
     States Geological Survey.
       (8) Transboundary aquifer.--The term ``transboundary 
     aquifer'' means an aquifer that underlies the boundary 
     between the United States and Mexico.
       (9) Tri-regional planning group.--The term ``Tri-Regional 
     Planning Group'' means the binational planning group 
     comprised of--
       (A) the Junta Municipal de Agua y Saneamiento de Ciudad 
     Juarez;
       (B) the El Paso Water Utilities Public Service Board; and
       (C) the Lower Rio Grande Water Users Organization.
       (10) Water resources research institutes.--The term ``water 
     resources research institutes'' means the institutes within 
     the Border States established under section 104 of the Water 
     Resources Research Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10303).

     SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation and 
     cooperation with the Border States, the water resources 
     research institutes, Sandia National Laboratories, and other 
     appropriate entities in the United States and Mexico, shall 
     carry out the United States-Mexico transboundary aquifer 
     assessment program to characterize, map, and model 
     transboundary groundwater resources along the United States-
     Mexico border at a level of detail determined to be 
     appropriate for the particular aquifer.
       (b) Objectives.--The objectives of the program are to--
       (1) develop and implement an integrated scientific approach 
     to assess transboundary groundwater resources, including--
       (A)(i) identifying fresh and saline transboundary aquifers; 
     and
       (ii) prioritizing the transboundary aquifers for further 
     analysis by assessing--
       (I) the proximity of the transboundary aquifer to areas of 
     high population density;
       (II) the extent to which the transboundary aquifer is used;
       (III) the susceptibility of the transboundary aquifer to 
     contamination; and
       (IV) any other relevant criteria;
       (B) evaluating all available data and publications as part 
     of the development of study plans for each priority 
     transboundary aquifer;
       (C) creating a new, or enhancing an existing, geographic 
     information system database to characterize the spatial and 
     temporal aspects of each priority transboundary aquifer; and
       (D) using field studies, including support for and 
     expansion of ongoing monitoring and metering efforts, to 
     develop--
       (i) the additional data necessary to adequately define 
     aquifer characteristics; and
       (ii) scientifically sound groundwater flow models to assist 
     with State and local water management and administration, 
     including modeling of relevant groundwater and surface water 
     interactions;
       (2) expand existing agreements, as appropriate, between the 
     United States Geological Survey, the Border States, the water 
     resources research institutes, and appropriate authorities in 
     the United States and Mexico, to--
       (A) conduct joint scientific investigations;
       (B) archive and share relevant data; and
       (C) carry out any other activities consistent with the 
     program; and
       (3) produce scientific products for each priority 
     transboundary aquifer that--
       (A) are capable of being broadly distributed; and
       (B) provide the scientific information needed by water 
     managers and natural resource agencies on both sides of the 
     United States-Mexico border to effectively accomplish the 
     missions of the managers and agencies.
       (c) Designation of Priority Transboundary Aquifers.--
       (1) In general.--For purposes of the program, the Secretary 
     shall designate as priority transboundary aquifers--
       (A) the Hueco Bolson and Mesilla aquifers underlying parts 
     of Texas, New Mexico, and Mexico; and
       (B) the Santa Cruz River Valley aquifers underlying Arizona 
     and Sonora, Mexico.
       (2) Additional aquifers.--The Secretary shall, using the 
     criteria under subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii), evaluate and 
     designate additional priority transboundary aquifers.
       (d) Cooperation With Mexico.--To ensure a comprehensive 
     assessment of transboundary aquifers, the Secretary shall, to 
     the maximum extent practicable, work with appropriate Federal 
     agencies and other organizations to develop partnerships 
     with, and receive input from, relevant organizations in 
     Mexico to carry out the program.
       (e) Grants and Cooperative Agreements.--The Secretary may 
     provide grants or enter into cooperative agreements and other 
     agreements with the water resources research institutes and 
     other Border State entities to carry out the program.

     SEC. 5. IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAM.

       (a) Coordination With States, Tribes, and Other Entities.--
     The Secretary shall coordinate the activities carried out 
     under the program with--
       (1) the appropriate water resource agencies in the Border 
     States;
       (2) any affected Indian tribes; and
       (3) any other appropriate entities that are conducting 
     monitoring and metering activity with respect to a priority 
     transboundary aquifer.
       (b) New Activity.--After the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary shall not initiate any new field studies or 
     analyses under the program before consulting with, and 
     coordinating the activity with, any Border State water 
     resource agencies that have jurisdiction over the aquifer.
       (c) Study Plans; Cost Estimates.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall work closely with 
     appropriate Border State water

[[Page 1031]]

     resource agencies, water resources research institutes, and 
     other relevant entities to develop a study plan, timeline, 
     and cost estimate for each priority transboundary aquifer to 
     be studied under the program.
       (2) Requirements.--A study plan developed under paragraph 
     (1) shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
       (A) integrate existing data collection and analyses 
     conducted with respect to the priority transboundary aquifer;
       (B) if applicable, improve and strengthen existing 
     groundwater flow models developed for the priority 
     transboundary aquifer; and
       (C) be consistent with appropriate State guidelines and 
     goals.

     SEC. 6. EFFECT.

       Nothing in this Act affects--
       (1) the jurisdiction or responsibility of a Border State 
     with respect to managing surface or groundwater resources in 
     the Border State; or
       (2) the water rights of any person or entity using water 
     from a transboundary aquifer.

     SEC. 7. REPORTS.

       Not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, and on completion of the program in fiscal year 2014, 
     the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate water resource 
     agency in the Border States, an interim and final report, 
     respectively, that describes--
       (1) any activities carried out under the program;
       (2) any conclusions of the Secretary relating to the status 
     of transboundary aquifers; and
       (3) the level of participation in the program of entities 
     in Mexico.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act $50,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 
     2006 through 2015.
       (b) Distribution of Funds.--Of the amounts made available 
     under subsection (a), 50 percent shall be made available to 
     the water resources research institutes to provide funding to 
     appropriate entities in the Border States (including Sandia 
     National Laboratories, State agencies, universities, the Tri-
     Regional Planning Group, and other relevant organizations) 
     and Mexico to conduct activities under the program, including 
     the binational collection and exchange of scientific data.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INOUYE:
  S. 215. A bill to amend the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement 
Act to revise and extend that Act; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to 
reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. Senator 
Akaka joins me in sponsoring this measure.
  The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act was enacted into law 
in 1988, and has been reauthorized every 4 years since that time.
  The Act provides authority for range of programs and services 
designed to improve the health care status of the Native people of 
Hawaii.
  With the enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act 
and the establishment of Native Hawaiian health care systems on most of 
the islands that make up the State of Hawaii, we have witnessed 
significant improvements in the health status of Native Hawaiians, but 
as the findings of unmet needs and health disparities set forth in this 
bill make clear, we still have a long way to go.
  For instance, Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality 
rates in the State of Hawaii--rates that are 21 percent higher than the 
rate for the total State male population and 64 percent higher than the 
rate for the total State female population. Nationally, Native 
Hawaiians have the third highest mortality rate as a result of breast 
cancer.
  With respect to diabetes, in 2000, Native Hawaiians had the highest 
mortality rate associated with diabetes in the State--a rate which is 
138 percent higher than the statewide rate for all racial groups.
  When it comes to heart disease, the mortality rate of Native 
Hawaiians associated with heart disease is 68 percent higher than the 
rate for the entire State, and the mortality rate for hypertension is 
84 percent higher than that for the entire State.
  These statistics on the health status of Native Hawaiians are but a 
small part of the long list of data that makes clear that our objective 
of assuring that the Native people of Hawaii attain some parity of good 
health comparable to that of the larger U.S. population has not yet 
been achieved.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 215

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Native Hawaiian Health Care 
     Improvement Reauthorization Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE NATIVE HAWAIIAN HEALTH CARE 
                   IMPROVEMENT ACT.

       The Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act (42 U.S.C. 
     11701 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       ``(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the `Native 
     Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act'.
       ``(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

``Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
``Sec. 2. Findings.
``Sec. 3. Definitions.
``Sec. 4. Declaration of national Native Hawaiian health policy.
``Sec. 5. Comprehensive health care master plan for Native Hawaiians.
``Sec. 6. Functions of Papa Ola Lokahi and Office of Hawaiian Affairs.
``Sec. 7. Native Hawaiian health care.
``Sec. 8. Administrative grant for Papa Ola Lokahi.
``Sec. 9. Administration of grants and contracts.
``Sec. 10. Assignment of personnel.
``Sec. 11. Native Hawaiian health scholarships and fellowships.
``Sec. 12. Report.
``Sec. 13. Use of Federal Government facilities and sources of supply.
``Sec. 14. Demonstration projects of national significance.
``Sec. 15. Rule of construction.
``Sec. 16. Compliance with Budget Act.
``Sec. 17. Severability.

     ``SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       ``(a) General Findings.--Congress finds that--
       ``(1) Native Hawaiians begin their story with the Kumulipo, 
     which details the creation and interrelationship of all 
     things, including the evolvement of Native Hawaiians as 
     healthy and well people;
       ``(2) Native Hawaiians--
       ``(A) are a distinct and unique indigenous people with a 
     historical continuity to the original inhabitants of the 
     Hawaiian archipelago within Ke Moananui, the Pacific Ocean; 
     and
       ``(B) have a distinct society that was first organized 
     almost 2,000 years ago;
       ``(3) the health and well-being of Native Hawaiians are 
     intrinsically tied to the deep feelings and attachment of 
     Native Hawaiians to their lands and seas;
       ``(4) the long-range economic and social changes in Hawaii 
     over the 19th and early 20th centuries have been devastating 
     to the health and well-being of Native Hawaiians;
       ``(5) Native Hawaiians have never directly relinquished to 
     the United States their claims to their inherent sovereignty 
     as a people or over their national territory, either through 
     their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum;
       ``(6) the Native Hawaiian people are determined to 
     preserve, develop, and transmit to future generations, in 
     accordance with their own spiritual and traditional beliefs, 
     their customs, practices, language, social institutions, 
     ancestral territory, and cultural identity;
       ``(7) in referring to themselves, Native Hawaiians use the 
     term `Kanaka Maoli', a term frequently used in the 19th 
     century to describe the native people of Hawaii;
       ``(8) the constitution and statutes of the State of 
     Hawaii--
       ``(A) acknowledge the distinct land rights of Native 
     Hawaiian people as beneficiaries of the public lands trust; 
     and
       ``(B) reaffirm and protect the unique right of the Native 
     Hawaiian people to practice and perpetuate their cultural and 
     religious customs, beliefs, practices, and language;
       ``(9) at the time of the arrival of the first nonindigenous 
     people in Hawaii in 1778, the Native Hawaiian people lived in 
     a highly organized, self-sufficient, subsistence social 
     system based on communal land tenure with a sophisticated 
     language, culture, and religion;
       ``(10) a unified monarchical government of the Hawaiian 
     Islands was established in 1810 under Kamehameha I, the first 
     King of Hawaii;
       ``(11) throughout the 19th century until 1893, the United 
     States--
       ``(A) recognized the independence of the Hawaiian Nation;
       ``(B) extended full and complete diplomatic recognition to 
     the Hawaiian Government; and
       ``(C) entered into treaties and conventions with the 
     Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and navigation in 1826, 
     1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887;
       ``(12) in 1893, John L. Stevens, the United States Minister 
     assigned to the sovereign and independent Kingdom of Hawaii, 
     conspired with a small group of non-Hawaiian

[[Page 1032]]

     residents of the Kingdom, including citizens of the United 
     States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful government of 
     Hawaii;
       ``(13) in pursuance of that conspiracy--
       ``(A) the United States Minister and the naval 
     representative of the United States caused armed forces of 
     the United States Navy to invade the sovereign Hawaiian 
     Nation in support of the overthrow of the indigenous and 
     lawful Government of Hawaii; and
       ``(B) after that overthrow, the United States Minister 
     extended diplomatic recognition of a provisional government 
     formed by the conspirators without the consent of the native 
     people of Hawaii or the lawful Government of Hawaii, in 
     violation of--
       ``(i) treaties between the Government of Hawaii and the 
     United States; and
       ``(ii) international law;
       ``(14) in a message to Congress on December 18, 1893, 
     President Grover Cleveland--
       ``(A) reported fully and accurately on those illegal 
     actions;
       ``(B) acknowledged that by those acts, described by the 
     President as acts of war, the government of a peaceful and 
     friendly people was overthrown; and
       ``(C) concluded that a `substantial wrong has thus been 
     done which a due regard for our national character as well as 
     the rights of the injured people required that we should 
     endeavor to repair';
       ``(15) Queen Lili`uokalani, the lawful monarch of Hawaii, 
     and the Hawaiian Patriotic League, representing the 
     aboriginal citizens of Hawaii, promptly petitioned the United 
     States for redress of those wrongs and restoration of the 
     indigenous government of the Hawaiian nation, but no action 
     was taken on that petition;
       ``(16) in 1993, Congress enacted Public Law 103-150 (107 
     Stat. 1510), in which Congress--
       ``(A) acknowledged the significance of those events; and
       ``(B) apologized to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the 
     people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom 
     of Hawaii with the participation of agents and citizens of 
     the United States, and the resulting deprivation of the 
     rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination;
       ``(17) in 1898, the United States--
       ``(A) annexed Hawaii through Resolution No. 55 (commonly 
     known as the `Newlands Resolution') (30 Stat. 750), without 
     the consent of, or compensation to, the indigenous people of 
     Hawaii or the sovereign government of those people; and
       ``(B) denied those people the mechanism for expression of 
     their inherent sovereignty through self-government and self-
     determination of their lands and ocean resources;
       ``(18) through the Newlands Resolution and the Act of April 
     30, 1900 (commonly known as the `1900 Organic Act') (31 Stat. 
     141, chapter 339), Congress--
       ``(A) received 1,750,000 acres of land formerly owned by 
     the Crown and Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom; and
       ``(B) exempted the land from then-existing public land laws 
     of the United States by mandating that the revenue and 
     proceeds from that land be `used solely for the benefit of 
     the inhabitants of the Hawaiian Islands for education and 
     other public purposes', thereby establishing a special trust 
     relationship between the United States and the inhabitants of 
     Hawaii;
       ``(19) in 1921, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Homes 
     Commission Act, 1920 (42 Stat. 108, chapter 42), which--
       ``(A) designated 200,000 acres of the ceded public land for 
     exclusive homesteading by Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(B) affirmed the trust relationship between the United 
     States and Native Hawaiians, as expressed by Secretary of the 
     Interior Franklin K. Lane, who was cited in the Committee 
     Report of the Committee on Territories of the House of 
     Representatives as stating, `One thing that impressed me . . 
     . was the fact that the natives of the islands . . . for whom 
     in a sense we are trustees, are falling off rapidly in 
     numbers and many of them are in poverty.';
       ``(20) in 1938, Congress again acknowledged the unique 
     status of the Native Hawaiian people by including in the Act 
     of June 20, 1938 (52 Stat. 781), a provision--
       ``(A) to lease land within the extension to Native 
     Hawaiians; and
       ``(B) to permit fishing in the area `only by native 
     Hawaiian residents of said area or of adjacent villages and 
     by visitors under their guidance';
       ``(21) under the Act of March 18, 1959 (48 U.S.C. prec. 491 
     note; 73 Stat. 4), the United States--
       ``(A) transferred responsibility for the administration of 
     the Hawaiian home lands to the State; but
       ``(B) reaffirmed the trust relationship that existed 
     between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people by 
     retaining the exclusive power to enforce the trust, including 
     the power to approve land exchanges and legislative 
     amendments affecting the rights of beneficiaries under that 
     Act;
       ``(22) under the Act referred to in paragraph (21), the 
     United States--
       ``(A) transferred responsibility for administration over 
     portions of the ceded public lands trust not retained by the 
     United States to the State; but
       ``(B) reaffirmed the trust relationship that existed 
     between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people by 
     retaining the legal responsibility of the State for the 
     betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians under 
     section 5(f) of that Act (73 Stat. 6);
       ``(23) in 1978, the people of Hawaii--
       ``(A) amended the constitution of Hawaii to establish the 
     Office of Hawaiian Affairs; and
       ``(B) assigned to that Office the authority--
       ``(i) to accept and hold in trust for the Native Hawaiian 
     people real and personal property transferred from any 
     source;
       ``(ii) to receive payments from the State owed to the 
     Native Hawaiian people in satisfaction of the pro rata share 
     of the proceeds of the public land trust established by 
     section 5(f) of the Act of March 18, 1959 (48 U.S.C. prec. 
     491 note; 73 Stat. 6);
       ``(iii) to act as the lead State agency for matters 
     affecting the Native Hawaiian people; and
       ``(iv) to formulate policy on affairs relating to the 
     Native Hawaiian people;
       ``(24) the authority of Congress under the Constitution to 
     legislate in matters affecting the aboriginal or indigenous 
     people of the United States includes the authority to 
     legislate in matters affecting the native people of Alaska 
     and Hawaii;
       ``(25) the United States has recognized the authority of 
     the Native Hawaiian people to continue to work toward an 
     appropriate form of sovereignty, as defined by the Native 
     Hawaiian people in provisions set forth in legislation 
     returning the Hawaiian Island of Kaho`olawe to custodial 
     management by the State in 1994;
       ``(26) in furtherance of the trust responsibility for the 
     betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians, the United 
     States has established a program for the provision of 
     comprehensive health promotion and disease prevention 
     services to maintain and improve the health status of the 
     Hawaiian people;
       ``(27) that program is conducted by the Native Hawaiian 
     Health Care Systems and Papa Ola Lokahi;
       ``(28) health initiatives implemented by those and other 
     health institutions and agencies using Federal assistance 
     have been responsible for reducing the century-old morbidity 
     and mortality rates of Native Hawaiian people by--
       ``(A) providing comprehensive disease prevention;
       ``(B) providing health promotion activities; and
       ``(C) increasing the number of Native Hawaiians in the 
     health and allied health professions;
       ``(29) those accomplishments have been achieved through 
     implementation of--
       ``(A) the Native Hawaiian Health Care Act of 1988 (Public 
     Law 100-579); and
       ``(B) the reauthorization of that Act under section 9168 of 
     the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1993 (Public 
     Law 102-396; 106 Stat. 1948);
       ``(30) the historical and unique legal relationship between 
     the United States and Native Hawaiians has been consistently 
     recognized and affirmed by Congress through the enactment of 
     more than 160 Federal laws that extend to the Native Hawaiian 
     people the same rights and privileges accorded to American 
     Indian, Alaska Native, Eskimo, and Aleut communities, 
     including--
       ``(A) the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
     2991 et seq.);
       ``(B) the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1996);
       ``(C) the National Museum of the American Indian Act (20 
     U.S.C. 80q et seq.); and
       ``(D) the Native American Graves Protection and 
     Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
       ``(31) the United States has recognized and reaffirmed the 
     trust relationship to the Native Hawaiian people through 
     legislation that authorizes the provision of services to 
     Native Hawaiians, specifically--
       ``(A) the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et 
     seq.);
       ``(B) the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of 
     Rights Act Amendments of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 6000 et seq.);
       ``(C) the Veterans' Benefits and Services Act of 1988 
     (Public Law 100-322);
       ``(D) the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 701 et 
     seq.);
       ``(E) the Native Hawaiian Health Care Act of 1988 (42 
     U.S.C. 11701 et seq.);
       ``(F) the Health Professions Reauthorization Act of 1988 
     (Public Law 100-607; 102 Stat. 3122);
       ``(G) the Nursing Shortage Reduction and Education 
     Extension Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-607; 102 Stat. 3153);
       ``(H) the Handicapped Programs Technical Amendments Act of 
     1988 (Public Law 100-630);
       ``(I) the Indian Health Care Amendments of 1988 (Public Law 
     100-713); and
       ``(J) the Disadvantaged Minority Health Improvement Act of 
     1990 (Public Law 101-527);
       ``(32) the United States has affirmed that historical and 
     unique legal relationship to the Hawaiian people by 
     authorizing the provision of services to Native Hawaiians to 
     address problems of alcohol and drug abuse under the Anti-
     Drug Abuse Act of 1986 (21 U.S.C. 801 note; Public Law 99-
     570);
       ``(33) in addition, the United States--

[[Page 1033]]

       ``(A) has recognized that Native Hawaiians, as aboriginal, 
     indigenous, native people of Hawaii, are a unique population 
     group in Hawaii and in the continental United States; and
       ``(B) has so declared in Office of Management and Budget 
     Circular 15 in 1997 and Presidential Executive Order No. 
     13125, dated June 7, 1999; and
       ``(34) despite the United States having expressed in Public 
     Law 103-150 (107 Stat. 1510) its commitment to a policy of 
     reconciliation with the Native Hawaiian people for past 
     grievances--
       ``(A) the unmet health needs of the Native Hawaiian people 
     remain severe; and
       ``(B) the health status of the Native Hawaiian people 
     continues to be far below that of the general population of 
     the United States.
       ``(b) Finding of Unmet Needs and Health Disparities.--
     Congress finds that the unmet needs and serious health 
     disparities that adversely affect the Native Hawaiian people 
     include the following:
       ``(1) Chronic disease and illness.--
       ``(A) Cancer.--
       ``(i) In general.--With respect to all cancer--

       ``(I) Native Hawaiians have the highest cancer mortality 
     rates in the State (216.8 out of every 100,000 male residents 
     and 191.6 out of every 100,000 female residents), rates that 
     are 21 percent higher than the rate for the total State male 
     population (179.0 out of every 100,000 residents) and 64 
     percent higher than the rate for the total State female 
     population (117.0 per 100,000);
       ``(II) Native Hawaiian males have the highest cancer 
     mortality rates in the State for cancers of the lung, colon, 
     rectum, and colorectum, and for all cancers combined;
       ``(III) Native Hawaiian females have the highest cancer 
     mortality rates in the State for cancers of the lung, liver, 
     pancreas, breast, corpus uteri, stomach, colon, and rectum, 
     and for all cancers combined;
       ``(IV) Native Hawaiian males have 8.7 years of productive 
     life lost as a result of cancer in the State, the highest 
     years of productive life lost in that State, as compared with 
     6.4 years for all males; and
       ``(V) Native Hawaiian females have 8.2 years of productive 
     life lost as a result of cancer in the State as compared with 
     6.4 years for all females in the State.

       ``(ii) Breast cancer.--With respect to breast cancer--

       ``(I) Native Hawaiians have the highest mortality rate in 
     the State from breast cancer (30.79 out of every 100,000 
     residents), a rate that is 33 percent higher than that for 
     Caucasian Americans (23.07 out of every 100,000 residents) 
     and 106 percent higher than that for Chinese Americans (14.96 
     out of every 100,000 residents); and
       ``(II) nationally, Native Hawaiians have the third highest 
     mortality rate as a result of breast cancer (25.0 out of 
     every 100,000 residents), behind African Americans (31.4 out 
     of every 100,000 residents) and Caucasian Americans (27.0 out 
     of every 100,000 residents).

       ``(iii) Cancer of the cervix.--Native Hawaiians have the 
     highest mortality rate as a result of cancer of the cervix in 
     the State (3.65 out of every 100,000 residents), followed by 
     Filipino Americans (2.69 out of every 100,000 residents) and 
     Caucasian Americans (2.61 out of every 100,000 residents).
       ``(iv) Lung cancer.--Native Hawaiian males and females have 
     the highest mortality rates as a result of lung cancer in the 
     State, at 74.79 per 100,000 for males and 47.84 per 100,000 
     females, which rates are higher than the rates for the total 
     State population by 48 percent for males and 93 percent for 
     females.
       ``(v) Prostate cancer.--Native Hawaiian males have the 
     third highest mortality rate as a result of prostate cancer 
     in the State (21.48 out of every 100,000 residents), with 
     Caucasian Americans having the highest mortality rate as a 
     result of prostate cancer (23.96 out of every 100,000 
     residents).
       ``(B) Diabetes.--With respect to diabetes, in 2000--
       ``(i) Native Hawaiians had the highest mortality rate as a 
     result of diabetes mellitis (38.8 out of every 100,000 
     residents) in the State, which rate is 138 percent higher 
     than the statewide rate for all racial groups (16.3 out of 
     every 100,000 residents); and
       ``(ii) full-blood Hawaiians had a mortality as a result of 
     diabetes mellitis of 93.3 out of every 100,000 residents, 
     which is 518 percent higher than the rate for the statewide 
     population of all other racial groups.
       ``(C) Asthma.--With respect to asthma--
       ``(i) in 1990, Native Hawaiians comprised 44 percent of all 
     asthma cases in the State for those 18 years of age and 
     younger, and 35 percent of all asthma cases reported; and
       ``(ii) in 1999, the Native Hawaiian prevalence rate for 
     asthma was 129.6 out of every 1,000 residents, which was 69 
     percent higher than the rate for all others combined in the 
     State (76.7 out of every 1,000 residents).
       ``(D) Circulatory diseases.--
       ``(i) Heart disease.--With respect to heart disease--

       ``(I) the mortality rate for Native Hawaiians as a result 
     of heart disease (372.3 out of every 100,000 residents) is 68 
     percent higher than the rate for the entire State (221.9 out 
     of every 100,000 residents); and
       ``(II) Native Hawaiian males have the greatest years of 
     productive life lost in the State, because Native Hawaiian 
     males lose an average of 15.5 years and Native Hawaiian 
     females lose an average of 8.2 years as a result of heart 
     disease, as compared with 7.5 years for all males, and 6.4 
     years for all females, in the State.

       ``(ii) Hypertension.--With respect to hypertension--

       ``(I) the mortality rate for Native Hawaiians as a result 
     of hypertension (3.5 out of every 100,000 residents) is 84 
     percent higher than that for the entire State (1.9 out of 
     every 100,000 residents);
       ``(II) Native Hawaiians have substantially higher 
     prevalence rates of hypertension than--

       ``(aa) those observed statewide; and
       ``(bb) those of any other ethnic group in Hawaii; and

       ``(III) the prevalence rate of hypertension for Native 
     Hawaiians is 37.9 percent, 11 percent higher than that for 
     all others in the State (34.1 percent).

       ``(iii) Stroke.--The mortality rate for Native Hawaiians as 
     a result of stroke (72.0 out of every 100,000 residents) is 
     20 percent higher than that for the entire State (60 out of 
     every 100,000 residents).
       ``(2) Infectious disease and illness.--With respect to 
     infectious disease and illness--
       ``(A) in 1998, Native Hawaiians comprised 20 percent of all 
     deaths resulting from infectious diseases in the State for 
     all ages; and
       ``(B) the incidence of acquired immune deficiency syndrome 
     for Native Hawaiians is at least twice as high per 100,000 
     residents (10.5 percent) than that for any other non-
     Caucasian group in the State.
       ``(3) Injuries.--With respect to injuries--
       ``(A) the mortality rate for Native Hawaiians as a result 
     of injuries (32.0 out of every 100,000 residents) is 16 
     percent higher than that for the entire State (27.5 out of 
     every 100,000 residents);
       ``(B) 32 percent of all deaths of individuals between the 
     ages of 18 and 24 years of age resulting from injuries were 
     Native Hawaiian; and
       ``(C) the 2 primary causes of Native Hawaiian deaths in 
     that age group were motor vehicle accidents (30 percent) and 
     intentional self-harm (39 percent).
       ``(4) Dental health.--With respect to dental health--
       ``(A) Native Hawaiian children exhibit among the highest 
     rates of dental caries in the United States, and the highest 
     in the State as compared with the 5 other major ethnic groups 
     in the State;
       ``(B) the average number of decayed or filled primary teeth 
     for Native Hawaiian children aged 5 through 9 years was 4.3, 
     as compared with 3.7 for all children in the State and 1.9 
     for all children in the United States; and
       ``(C) the proportion of Native Hawaiian children aged 5 
     through 12 years with unmet dental treatment needs (defined 
     as having active dental caries requiring treatment) is 40 
     percent, as compared with 33 percent for all other racial 
     groups in the State.
       ``(5) Life expectancy.--With respect to life expectancy--
       ``(A) Native Hawaiians have the lowest life expectancy of 
     all population groups in the State;
       ``(B) between 1910 and 1980, the life expectancy of Native 
     Hawaiians from birth has ranged from 5 to 10 years less than 
     that of the overall State population average; and
       ``(C) the most recent tables for 1990 show Native Hawaiian 
     life expectancy at birth (74.27 years) to be approximately 5 
     years less than that of the total State population (78.85 
     years).
       ``(6) Maternal and child health.--
       ``(A) In general.--With respect to maternal and child 
     health, for 2000--
       ``(i) 39 percent of all deaths of children under the age of 
     18 years in the State were Native Hawaiian; and
       ``(ii) perinatal conditions accounted for 38 percent of all 
     Native Hawaiian deaths in that age group.
       ``(B) Prenatal care.--With respect to prenatal care--
       ``(i) as of 1998, Native Hawaiian women have the highest 
     prevalence (24 percent) of having had no prenatal care during 
     the first trimester of pregnancy, as compared with the 5 
     largest ethnic groups in the State;
       ``(ii) of the mothers in the State who received no prenatal 
     care throughout their pregnancies in 1996, 44 percent were 
     Native Hawaiian;
       ``(iii) more than 65 percent of the referrals to Healthy 
     Start in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 were Native Hawaiian 
     newborns; and
       ``(iv) in every region of the State, many Native Hawaiian 
     newborns begin life in a potentially hazardous circumstance, 
     far higher than any other racial group.
       ``(C) Births.--With respect to births--
       ``(i) in 1996, 45 percent of the live births to Native 
     Hawaiian mothers were infants born to single mothers, a 
     circumstance which statistics indicate puts infants at higher 
     risk of low birth weight and infant mortality;
       ``(ii) in 1996, of the births to Native Hawaiian single 
     mothers, 8 percent were low birth weight (defined as a weight 
     of less than 2,500 grams); and
       ``(iii) of all low birth weight infants born to single 
     mothers in the State, 44 percent were Native Hawaiian.

[[Page 1034]]

       ``(D) Teen pregnancies.--With respect to births--
       ``(i) in 1993 and 1994, Native Hawaiians had the highest 
     percentage of teen (individuals who were less than 18 years 
     of age) births (8.1 percent), as compared with the rate for 
     all other racial groups in the State (3.6 percent);
       ``(ii) in 1998, nearly 49 percent of all mothers in the 
     State under 19 years of age were Native Hawaiian;
       ``(iii) in 1998, Native Hawaiians comprised 31 percent 
     (1,425) of all live births to mothers with medical risk 
     factors in the State (4,559); and
       ``(iv) lower rates of abortion (approximately 33 percent 
     lower than for the statewide population) among Hawaiian women 
     may account, in part, for that higher percentage of live 
     births.
       ``(E) Fetal mortality.--With respect to fetal mortality--
       ``(i) in 2000, Native Hawaiians had the highest number of 
     fetal deaths in the State; and
       ``(ii)(I) 21 percent of all fetal deaths in the State were 
     associated with expectant Native Hawaiian mothers; and
       ``(II) 37 percent of those Native Hawaiian mothers were 
     under the age of 25 years.
       ``(7) Mental health.--
       ``(A) Alcohol and drug abuse.--With respect to alcohol and 
     drug abuse--
       ``(i) Native Hawaiians represent 38 percent of the total 
     admissions to substance abuse treatment programs funded by 
     the Department of Health, Alcohol, Drugs and Other Drugs of 
     the State;
       ``(ii) in 2000, the prevalence of cigarette smoking by 
     Native Hawaiians was 31.0 percent, a rate that is 57 percent 
     higher than that for the total population in the State, which 
     is 19.7 percent;
       ``(iii) Native Hawaiians have the highest prevalence rate 
     of acute alcohol drinking (19.6 percent), a rate that is 40 
     percent higher than that for the total population in the 
     State;
       ``(iv) the chronic alcohol drinking rate among Native 
     Hawaiians is 54 percent higher than that for all other racial 
     groups in the State;
       ``(v) in 1991, 40 percent of Native Hawaiian adults 
     surveyed reported having used marijuana, as compared with 30 
     percent for all other racial groups in the State; and
       ``(vi) 9 percent of the Native Hawaiian adults surveyed 
     reported that they use or have used marijuana within the year 
     preceding the survey, as compared with 6 percent for all 
     other racial groups in the State.
       ``(B) Crime.--With respect to crime--
       ``(i) in 1998, of the 7,789 arrests that were made for 
     property crimes in the State, arrests of Native Hawaiians 
     comprised 23 percent;
       ``(ii) Native Hawaiians comprised 40 percent of juvenile 
     arrests in 1998, the largest percentage of all juvenile 
     arrests in that year;
       ``(iii) in the period of 1996 through 1998, the 
     overrepresentation of Native Hawaiian juvenile arrests for 
     index crimes and Part II offenses increased by 6 percent and 
     2 percent, respectively;
       ``(iv) in 1998, Native Hawaiians represented 22 percent of 
     the 2,423 adults arrested for drug-related offenses in the 
     State;
       ``(v) Native Hawaiians are overrepresented in the prison 
     population in the State;
       ``(vi) of the 2,260 incarcerated Native Hawaiians, 70 
     percent are between 20 and 40 years of age;
       ``(vii) in 1995 and 1996, Native Hawaiians comprised 36.5 
     percent of the sentenced felon prison population in Hawaii, 
     as compared with 20.5 percent for Caucasian Americans, 3.7 
     percent for Japanese Americans, and 6 percent for Chinese 
     Americans;
       ``(viii) in 2002, Native Hawaiians comprised 40 percent of 
     the total sentenced felon population in the State, as 
     compared with 25 percent for Caucasian Americans, 12 percent 
     for Filipino Americans, 6 percent for Japanese Americans, and 
     5 percent for Samoans; and
       ``(ix) based on anecdotal information from inmates at the 
     Halawa Correction Facilities, Native Hawaiians are estimated 
     to comprise between 60 and 70 percent of all inmates in the 
     State.
       ``(8) Obesity.--Native Hawaiians have the highest 
     prevalence rate of overweightness and obesity (69.4 percent), 
     a rate that is 38 percent higher than that for the total 
     State population (50.2 percent).
       ``(9) Health professions education and training.--With 
     respect to health professions education and training--
       ``(A)(i) Native Hawaiians who are at least 25 years of age 
     have a comparable rate of high school completion as compared 
     with all people in the State who are at least 25 years of 
     age; but
       ``(ii) the rate of baccalaureate degree achievement among 
     Native Hawaiians is 6.9 percent, which is less than the 
     average in the State (15.76 percent);
       ``(B) Native Hawaiian physicians make up 4 percent of the 
     total physician workforce in the State; and
       ``(C)(i) in fiscal year 1999, Native Hawaiians comprised--
       ``(I) 9 percent of those individuals who earned Bachelor's 
     degrees;
       ``(II) 15 percent of those individuals who earned 2-year 
     diplomas; and
       ``(III) 6 percent of those individuals who earned Master's 
     degrees; and
       ``(ii) in 1997, Native Hawaiians comprised less than 1 
     percent of individuals who earned doctoral degrees at the 
     University of Hawaii.

     ``SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this Act:
       ``(1) Department.--The term `Department' means the 
     Department of Health and Human Services.
       ``(2) Disease prevention.--The term `disease prevention' 
     includes--
       ``(A) immunizations;
       ``(B) control of high blood pressure;
       ``(C) control of sexually transmittable diseases;
       ``(D) prevention and control of chronic diseases;
       ``(E) control of toxic agents;
       ``(F) occupational safety and health;
       ``(G) injury prevention;
       ``(H) fluoridation of water;
       ``(I) control of infectious agents; and
       ``(J) provision of mental health care.
       ``(3) Health promotion.--The term `health promotion' 
     includes--
       ``(A) pregnancy and infant care, including prevention of 
     fetal alcohol syndrome;
       ``(B) cessation of tobacco smoking;
       ``(C) reduction in the misuse of alcohol and harmful 
     illicit drugs;
       ``(D) improvement of nutrition;
       ``(E) improvement in physical fitness;
       ``(F) family planning;
       ``(G) control of stress;
       ``(H) reduction of major behavioral risk factors and 
     promotion of healthy lifestyle practices; and
       ``(I) integration of cultural approaches to health and 
     well-being (including traditional practices relating to the 
     atmosphere (lewa lani), land (`aina), water (wai), and ocean 
     (kai)).
       ``(4) Health service.--The term `health service' means--
       ``(A) service provided by a physician, physician's 
     assistant, nurse practitioner, nurse, dentist, or other 
     health professional;
       ``(B) a diagnostic laboratory or radiologic service;
       ``(C) a preventive health service (including a perinatal 
     service, well child service, family planning service, 
     nutrition service, home health service, sports medicine and 
     athletic training service, and, generally, any service 
     associated with enhanced health and wellness);
       ``(D) emergency medical service, including a service 
     provided by a first responder, emergency medical technician, 
     or mobile intensive care technician;
       ``(E) a transportation service required for adequate 
     patient care;
       ``(F) a preventive dental service;
       ``(G) a pharmaceutical and medicament service;
       ``(H) a mental health service, including a service provided 
     by a psychologist or social worker;
       ``(I) a genetic counseling service;
       ``(J) a health administration service, including a service 
     provided by a health program administrator;
       ``(K) a health research service, including a service 
     provided by an individual with an advanced degree in 
     medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, or any other 
     related health program;
       ``(L) an environmental health service, including a service 
     provided by an epidemiologist, public health official, 
     medical geographer, or medical anthropologist, or an 
     individual specializing in biological, chemical, or 
     environmental health determinants;
       ``(M) a primary care service that may lead to specialty or 
     tertiary care; and
       ``(N) a complementary healing practice, including a 
     practice performed by a traditional Native Hawaiian healer.
       ``(5) Native hawaiian.--The term `Native Hawaiian' means 
     any individual who is Kanaka Maoli (a descendant of the 
     aboriginal people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised 
     sovereignty in the area that now constitutes the State), as 
     evidenced by--
       ``(A) genealogical records;
       ``(B) kama`aina witness verification from Native Hawaiian 
     Kupuna (elders); or
       ``(C) birth records of the State or any other State or 
     territory of the United States.
       ``(6) Native hawaiian health care system.--The term `Native 
     Hawaiian health care system' means any of up to 8 entities in 
     the State that--
       ``(A) is organized under the laws of the State;
       ``(B) provides or arranges for the provision of health 
     services for Native Hawaiians in the State;
       ``(C) is a public or nonprofit private entity;
       ``(D) has Native Hawaiians significantly participating in 
     the planning, management, provision, monitoring, and 
     evaluation of health services;
       ``(E) addresses the health care needs of an island's Native 
     Hawaiian population; and
       ``(F) is recognized by Papa Ola Lokahi--
       ``(i) for the purpose of planning, conducting, or 
     administering programs, or portions of programs, authorized 
     by this Act for the benefit of Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(ii) as having the qualifications and the capacity to 
     provide the services and meet the requirements under--

       ``(I) the contract that each Native Hawaiian health care 
     system enters into with the Secretary under this Act; or

[[Page 1035]]

       ``(II) the grant each Native Hawaiian health care system 
     receives from the Secretary under this Act.

       ``(7) Native hawaiian health center.--The term `Native 
     Hawaiian Health Center' means any organization that is a 
     primary health care provider that--
       ``(A) has a governing board composed of individuals, at 
     least 50 percent of whom are Native Hawaiians;
       ``(B) has demonstrated cultural competency in a 
     predominantly Native Hawaiian community;
       ``(C) serves a patient population that--
       ``(i) is made up of individuals at least 50 percent of whom 
     are Native Hawaiian; or
       ``(ii) has not less than 2,500 Native Hawaiians as annual 
     users of services; and
       ``(D) is recognized by Papa Ola Lokahi as having met each 
     of the criteria described in subparagraphs (A) through (C).
       ``(8) Native hawaiian health task force.--The term `Native 
     Hawaiian Health Task Force' means a task force established by 
     the State Council of Hawaiian Homestead Associations to 
     implement health and wellness strategies in Native Hawaiian 
     communities.
       ``(9) Native hawaiian organization.--The term `Native 
     Hawaiian organization' means any organization that--
       ``(A) serves the interests of Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(B)(i) is recognized by Papa Ola Lokahi for planning, 
     conducting, or administering programs authorized under this 
     Act for the benefit of Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(ii) is a public or nonprofit private entity.
       ``(10) Office of hawaiian affairs.--The term `Office of 
     Hawaiian Affairs' means the governmental entity that--
       ``(A) is established under article XII, sections 5 and 6, 
     of the Hawaii State Constitution; and
       ``(B) charged with the responsibility to formulate policy 
     relating to the affairs of Native Hawaiians.
       ``(11) Papa ola lokahi.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `Papa Ola Lokahi' means an 
     organization that--
       ``(i) is composed of public agencies and private 
     organizations focusing on improving the health status of 
     Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(ii) governed by a board the members of which may include 
     representation from--

       ``(I) E Ola Mau;
       ``(II) the Office of Hawaiian Affairs;
       ``(III) Alu Like, Inc.;
       ``(IV) the University of Hawaii;
       ``(V) the Hawaii State Department of Health;
       ``(VI) the Native Hawaiian Health Task Force;
       ``(VII) the Hawaii State Primary Care Association;
       ``(VIII) Ahahui O Na Kauka, the Native Hawaiian Physicians 
     Association;
       ``(IX) Ho`ola Lahui Hawaii, or a health care system serving 
     the islands of Kaua`i or Ni`ihau (which may be composed of as 
     many health care centers as are necessary to meet the health 
     care needs of the Native Hawaiians of those islands);
       ``(X) Ke Ola Mamo, or a health care system serving the 
     island of O`ahu (which may be composed of as many health care 
     centers as are necessary to meet the health care needs of the 
     Native Hawaiians of that island);
       ``(XI) Na Pu`uwai or a health care system serving the 
     islands of Moloka`i or Lana`i (which may be composed of as 
     many health care centers as are necessary to meet the health 
     care needs of the Native Hawaiians of those islands);
       ``(XII) Hui No Ke Ola Pono, or a health care system serving 
     the island of Maui (which may be composed of as many health 
     care centers as are necessary to meet the health care needs 
     of the Native Hawaiians of that island);
       ``(XIII) Hui Malama Ola Na `Oiwi, or a health care system 
     serving the island of Hawaii (which may be composed of as 
     many health care centers as are necessary to meet the health 
     care needs of the Native Hawaiians of that island);
       ``(XIV) such other Native Hawaiian health care systems as 
     are certified and recognized by Papa Ola Lokahi in accordance 
     with this Act; and
       ``(XV) such other member organizations as the Board of Papa 
     Ola Lokahi shall admit from time to time, based on 
     satisfactory demonstration of a record of contribution to the 
     health and well-being of Native Hawaiians.

       ``(B) Exclusion.--The term `Papa Ola Lokahi' does not 
     include any organization described in subparagraph (A) for 
     which the Secretary has made a determination that the 
     organization has not developed a mission statement that 
     includes--
       ``(i) clearly-defined goals and objectives for the 
     contributions the organization will make to--

       ``(I) Native Hawaiian health care systems; and
       ``(II) the national policy described in section 4; and

       ``(ii) an action plan for carrying out those goals and 
     objectives.
       ``(12) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.
       ``(13) State.--The term `State' means the State of Hawaii.
       ``(14) Traditional native hawaiian healer.--The term 
     `traditional Native Hawaiian healer' means a practitioner--
       ``(A) who--
       ``(i) is of Native Hawaiian ancestry; and
       ``(ii) has the knowledge, skills, and experience in direct 
     personal health care of individuals; and
       ``(B) the knowledge, skills, and experience of whom are 
     based on demonstrated learning of Native Hawaiian healing 
     practices acquired by--
       ``(i) direct practical association with Native Hawaiian 
     elders; and
       ``(ii) oral traditions transmitted from generation to 
     generation.

     ``SEC. 4. DECLARATION OF NATIONAL NATIVE HAWAIIAN HEALTH 
                   POLICY.

       ``(a) Declaration.--Congress declares that it is the policy 
     of the United States, in fulfillment of special 
     responsibilities and legal obligations of the United States 
     to the indigenous people of Hawaii resulting from the unique 
     and historical relationship between the United States and the 
     indigenous people of Hawaii--
       ``(1) to raise the health status of Native Hawaiians to the 
     highest practicable health level; and
       ``(2) to provide Native Hawaiian health care programs with 
     all resources necessary to effectuate that policy.
       ``(b) Intent of Congress.--It is the intent of Congress 
     that--
       ``(1) health care programs having a demonstrated effect of 
     substantially reducing or eliminating the overrepresentation 
     of Native Hawaiians among those suffering from chronic and 
     acute disease and illness, and addressing the health needs of 
     Native Hawaiians (including perinatal, early child 
     development, and family-based health education needs), shall 
     be established and implemented; and
       ``(2) the United States--
       ``(A) raise the health status of Native Hawaiians by the 
     year 2010 to at least the levels described in the goals 
     contained within Healthy People 2010 (or successor 
     standards); and
       ``(B) incorporate within health programs in the United 
     States activities defined and identified by Kanaka Maoli, 
     such as--
       ``(i) incorporating and supporting the integration of 
     cultural approaches to health and well-being, including 
     programs using traditional practices relating to the 
     atmosphere (lewa lani), land ('aina), water (wai), or ocean 
     (kai);
       ``(ii) increasing the number of Native Hawaiian health and 
     allied-health providers who provide care to or have an impact 
     on the health status of Native Hawaiians;
       ``(iii) increasing the use of traditional Native Hawaiian 
     foods in--

       ``(I) the diets and dietary preferences of people, 
     including those of students; and
       ``(II) school feeding programs;

       ``(iv) identifying and instituting Native Hawaiian cultural 
     values and practices within the corporate cultures of 
     organizations and agencies providing health services to 
     Native Hawaiians;
       ``(v) facilitating the provision of Native Hawaiian healing 
     practices by Native Hawaiian healers for individuals desiring 
     that assistance;
       ``(vi) supporting training and education activities and 
     programs in traditional Native Hawaiian healing practices by 
     Native Hawaiian healers; and
       ``(vii) demonstrating the integration of health services 
     for Native Hawaiians, particularly those that integrate 
     mental, physical, and dental services in health care.
       ``(c) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the President, 
     for inclusion in each report required to be submitted to 
     Congress under section 12, a report on the progress made 
     toward meeting the national policy described in this section.

     ``SEC. 5. COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE MASTER PLAN FOR NATIVE 
                   HAWAIIANS.

       ``(a) Development.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may make a grant to, or 
     enter into a contract with, Papa Ola Lokahi for the purpose 
     of coordinating, implementing, and updating a Native Hawaiian 
     comprehensive health care master plan that is designed--
       ``(A) to promote comprehensive health promotion and disease 
     prevention services;
       ``(B) to maintain and improve the health status of Native 
     Hawaiians; and
       ``(C) to support community-based initiatives that are 
     reflective of holistic approaches to health.
       ``(2) Consultation.--
       ``(A) In general.--In carrying out this section, Papa Ola 
     Lokahi and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs shall consult with 
     representatives of--
       ``(i) the Native Hawaiian health care systems;
       ``(ii) the Native Hawaiian health centers; and
       ``(iii) the Native Hawaiian community.
       ``(B) Memoranda of understanding.--Papa Ola Lokahi and the 
     Office of Hawaiian Affairs may enter into memoranda of 
     understanding or agreement for the purpose of acquiring joint 
     funding, or for such other purposes as are necessary, to 
     accomplish the objectives of this section.
       ``(3) Health care financing study report.--

[[Page 1036]]

       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     of enactment of the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement 
     Reauthorization Act of 2005, Papa Ola Lokahi, in cooperation 
     with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and other appropriate 
     agencies and organizations in the State (including the 
     Department of Health and the Department of Human Services of 
     the State) and appropriate Federal agencies (including the 
     Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), shall submit to 
     Congress a report that describes the impact of Federal and 
     State health care financing mechanisms and policies on the 
     health and well-being of Native Hawaiians.
       ``(B) Components.--The report shall include--
       ``(i) information concerning the impact on Native Hawaiian 
     health and well-being of--

       ``(I) cultural competency;
       ``(II) risk assessment data;
       ``(III) eligibility requirements and exemptions; and
       ``(IV) reimbursement policies and capitation rates in 
     effect as of the date of the report for service providers;

       ``(ii) such other similar information as may be important 
     to improving the health status of Native Hawaiians, as that 
     information relates to health care financing (including 
     barriers to health care); and
       ``(iii) recommendations for submission to the Secretary, 
     for review and consultation with the Native Hawaiian 
     community.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out subsection (a).

     ``SEC. 6. FUNCTIONS OF PAPA OLA LOKAHI AND OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN 
                   AFFAIRS.

       ``(a) In General.--Papa Ola Lokahi--
       ``(1) shall be responsible for--
       ``(A) the coordination, implementation, and updating, as 
     appropriate, of the comprehensive health care master plan 
     under section 5;
       ``(B) the training and education of individuals providing 
     health services;
       ``(C) the identification of and research (including 
     behavioral, biomedical, epidemiological, and health service 
     research) into the diseases that are most prevalent among 
     Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(D) the development and maintenance of an institutional 
     review board for all research projects involving all aspects 
     of Native Hawaiian health, including behavioral, biomedical, 
     epidemiological, and health service research;
       ``(2) may receive special project funds (including research 
     endowments under section 736 of the Public Health Service Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 293)) made available for the purpose of--
       ``(A) research on the health status of Native Hawaiians; or
       ``(B) addressing the health care needs of Native Hawaiians; 
     and
       ``(3) shall serve as a clearinghouse for--
       ``(A) the collection and maintenance of data associated 
     with the health status of Native Hawaiians;
       ``(B) the identification and research into diseases 
     affecting Native Hawaiians;
       ``(C) the availability of Native Hawaiian project funds, 
     research projects, and publications;
       ``(D) the collaboration of research in the area of Native 
     Hawaiian health; and
       ``(E) the timely dissemination of information pertinent to 
     the Native Hawaiian health care systems.
       ``(b) Consultation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary and the Secretary of each 
     other Federal agency shall--
       ``(A) consult with Papa Ola Lokahi; and
       ``(B) provide Papa Ola Lokahi and the Office of Hawaiian 
     Affairs, at least once annually, an accounting of funds and 
     services provided by the Secretary to assist in accomplishing 
     the purposes described in section 4.
       ``(2) Components of accounting.--The accounting under 
     paragraph (1)(B) shall include an identification of--
       ``(A) the amount of funds expended explicitly for and 
     benefiting Native Hawaiians;
       ``(B) the number of Native Hawaiians affected by those 
     funds;
       ``(C) the collaborations between the applicable Federal 
     agency and Native Hawaiian groups and organizations in the 
     expenditure of those funds; and
       ``(D) the amount of funds used for--
       ``(i) Federal administrative purposes; and
       ``(ii) the provision of direct services to Native 
     Hawaiians.
       ``(c) Fiscal Allocation and Coordination of Programs and 
     Services.--
       ``(1) Recommendations.--Papa Ola Lokahi shall provide 
     annual recommendations to the Secretary with respect to the 
     allocation of all amounts made available under this Act.
       ``(2) Coordination.--Papa Ola Lokahi shall, to the maximum 
     extent practicable, coordinate and assist the health care 
     programs and services provided to Native Hawaiians under this 
     Act and other Federal laws.
       ``(3) Representation on commission.--The Secretary, in 
     consultation with Papa Ola Lokahi, shall make recommendations 
     for Native Hawaiian representation on the President's 
     Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.
       ``(d) Technical Support.--Papa Ola Lokahi shall provide 
     statewide infrastructure to provide technical support and 
     coordination of training and technical assistance to--
       ``(1) the Native Hawaiian health care systems; and
       ``(2) the Native Hawaiian health centers.
       ``(e) Relationships With Other Agencies.--
       ``(1) Authority.--Papa Ola Lokahi may enter into agreements 
     or memoranda of understanding with relevant institutions, 
     agencies, or organizations that are capable of providing--
       ``(A) health-related resources or services to Native 
     Hawaiians and the Native Hawaiian health care systems; or
       ``(B) resources or services for the implementation of the 
     national policy described in section 4.
       ``(2) Health care financing.--
       ``(A) Federal consultation.--
       ``(i) In general.--Before adopting any policy, rule, or 
     regulation that may affect the provision of services or 
     health insurance coverage for Native Hawaiians, a Federal 
     agency that provides health care financing and carries out 
     health care programs (including the Centers for Medicare and 
     Medicaid Services) shall consult with representatives of--

       ``(I) the Native Hawaiian community;
       ``(II) Papa Ola Lokahi; and
       ``(III) organizations providing health care services to 
     Native Hawaiians in the State.

       ``(ii) Identification of effects.--Any consultation by a 
     Federal agency under clause (i) shall include an 
     identification of the effect of any policy, rule, or 
     regulation proposed by the Federal agency.
       ``(B) State consultation.--Before making any change in an 
     existing program or implementing any new program relating to 
     Native Hawaiian health, the State shall engage in meaningful 
     consultation with representatives of--
       ``(i) the Native Hawaiian community;
       ``(ii) Papa Ola Lokahi; and
       ``(iii) organizations providing health care services to 
     Native Hawaiians in the State.
       ``(C) Consultation on federal health insurance programs.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, in 
     collaboration with Papa Ola Lokahi, may develop consultative, 
     contractual, or other arrangements, including memoranda of 
     understanding or agreement, with--

       ``(I) the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services;
       ``(II) the agency of the State that administers or 
     supervises the administration of the State plan or waiver 
     approved under title XVIII, XIX, or XXI of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.) for the payment of all 
     or a part of the health care services provided to Native 
     Hawaiians who are eligible for medical assistance under the 
     State plan or waiver; or
       ``(III) any other Federal agency providing full or partial 
     health insurance to Native Hawaiians.

       ``(ii) Contents of arrangements.--An arrangement under 
     clause (i) may address--

       ``(I) appropriate reimbursement for health care services, 
     including capitation rates and fee-for-service rates for 
     Native Hawaiians who are entitled to or eligible for 
     insurance;
       ``(II) the scope of services; or
       ``(III) other matters that would enable Native Hawaiians to 
     maximize health insurance benefits provided by Federal and 
     State health insurance programs.

       ``(3) Traditional healers.--
       ``(A) In general.--The provision of health services under 
     any program operated by the Department or another Federal 
     agency (including the Department of Veterans Affairs) may 
     include the services of--
       ``(i) traditional Native Hawaiian healers; or
       ``(ii) traditional healers providing traditional health 
     care practices (as those terms are defined in section 4 of 
     the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (25 U.S.C. 1603).
       ``(B) Exemption.--Services described in subparagraph (A) 
     shall be exempt from national accreditation reviews, 
     including reviews conducted by--
       ``(i) the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare 
     Organizations; and
       ``(ii) the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation 
     Facilities.

     ``SEC. 7. NATIVE HAWAIIAN HEALTH CARE.

       ``(a) Comprehensive Health Promotion, Disease Prevention, 
     and Other Health Services.--
       ``(1) Grants and contracts.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with Papa Ola Lokahi, may make grants to, or enter into 
     contracts with 1 or more Native Hawaiian health care systems 
     for the purpose of providing comprehensive health promotion 
     and disease prevention services, as well as other health 
     services, to Native Hawaiians who desire and are committed to 
     bettering their own health.
       ``(2) Limitation on number of entities.--The Secretary may 
     make a grant to, or enter into a contract with, not more than 
     8 Native Hawaiian health care systems under this subsection 
     for any fiscal year.
       ``(b) Planning Grant or Contract.--In addition to grants 
     and contracts under subsection (a), the Secretary may make a 
     grant to, or enter into a contract with, Papa Ola

[[Page 1037]]

     Lokahi for the purpose of planning Native Hawaiian health 
     care systems to serve the health needs of Native Hawaiian 
     communities on each of the islands of O`ahu, Moloka`i, Maui, 
     Hawai`i, Lana`i, Kaua`i, Kaho`lawe, and Ni`ihau in the State.
       ``(c) Health Services To Be Provided.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each recipient of funds under subsection 
     (a) may provide or arrange for--
       ``(A) outreach services to inform and assist Native 
     Hawaiians in accessing health services;
       ``(B) education in health promotion and disease prevention 
     for Native Hawaiians that, wherever practicable, is provided 
     by--
       ``(i) Native Hawaiian health care practitioners;
       ``(ii) community outreach workers;
       ``(iii) counselors;
       ``(iv) cultural educators; and
       ``(v) other disease prevention providers;
       ``(C) services of individuals providing health services;
       ``(D) collection of data relating to the prevention of 
     diseases and illnesses among Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(E) support of culturally appropriate activities that 
     enhance health and wellness, including land-based, water-
     based, ocean-based, and spiritually-based projects and 
     programs.
       ``(2) Traditional healers.--The health care services 
     referred to in paragraph (1) that are provided under grants 
     or contracts under subsection (a) may be provided by 
     traditional Native Hawaiian healers, as appropriate.
       ``(d) Federal Tort Claims Act.--An individual who provides 
     a medical, dental, or other service referred to in subsection 
     (a)(1) for a Native Hawaiian health care system, including a 
     provider of a traditional Native Hawaiian healing service, 
     shall be--
       ``(1) treated as if the individual were a member of the 
     Public Health Service; and
       ``(2) subject to section 224 of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 233).
       ``(e) Site for Other Federal Payments.--
       ``(1) In general.--A Native Hawaiian health care system 
     that receives funds under subsection (a) may serve as a 
     Federal loan repayment facility.
       ``(2) Remission of payments.--A facility described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be designed to enable health and allied-
     health professionals to remit payments with respect to loans 
     provided to the professionals under any Federal loan program.
       ``(f) Restriction on Use of Grant and Contract Funds.--The 
     Secretary shall not make a grant to, or enter into a contract 
     with, an entity under subsection (a) unless the entity agrees 
     that amounts received under the grant or contract will not, 
     directly or through contract, be expended--
       ``(1) for any service other than a service described in 
     subsection (c)(1);
       ``(2) to purchase or improve real property (other than 
     minor remodeling of existing improvements to real property); 
     or
       ``(3) to purchase major medical equipment.
       ``(g) Limitation on Charges for Services.--The Secretary 
     shall not make a grant to, or enter into a contract with, an 
     entity under subsection (a) unless the entity agrees that, 
     whether health services are provided directly or under a 
     contract--
       ``(1) any health service under the grant or contract will 
     be provided without regard to the ability of an individual 
     receiving the health service to pay for the health service; 
     and
       ``(2) the entity will impose for the delivery of such a 
     health service a charge that is--
       ``(A) made according to a schedule of charges that is made 
     available to the public; and
       ``(B) adjusted to reflect the income of the individual 
     involved.
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) General grants.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     subsection (a) for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011.
       ``(2) Planning grants.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     subsection (b) for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011.
       ``(3) Health services.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     subsection (c) for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011.

     ``SEC. 8. ADMINISTRATIVE GRANT FOR PAPA OLA LOKAHI.

       ``(a) In General.--In addition to any other grant or 
     contract under this Act, the Secretary may make grants to, or 
     enter into contracts with, Papa Ola Lokahi for--
       ``(1) coordination, implementation, and updating (as 
     appropriate) of the comprehensive health care master plan 
     developed under section 5;
       ``(2) training and education for providers of health 
     services;
       ``(3) identification of and research (including behavioral, 
     biomedical, epidemiologic, and health service research) into 
     the diseases that are most prevalent among Native Hawaiians;
       ``(4) a clearinghouse function for--
       ``(A) the collection and maintenance of data associated 
     with the health status of Native Hawaiians;
       ``(B) the identification and research into diseases 
     affecting Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(C) the availability of Native Hawaiian project funds, 
     research projects, and publications;
       ``(5) the establishment and maintenance of an institutional 
     review board for all health-related research involving Native 
     Hawaiians;
       ``(6) the coordination of the health care programs and 
     services provided to Native Hawaiians; and
       ``(7) the administration of special project funds.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out subsection (a) for each of fiscal years 2006 
     through 2011.

     ``SEC. 9. ADMINISTRATION OF GRANTS AND CONTRACTS.

       ``(a) Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary shall include in 
     any grant made or contract entered into under this Act such 
     terms and conditions as the Secretary considers necessary or 
     appropriate to ensure that the objectives of the grant or 
     contract are achieved.
       ``(b) Periodic Review.--The Secretary shall periodically 
     evaluate the performance of, and compliance with, grants and 
     contracts under this Act.
       ``(c) Administrative Requirements.--The Secretary shall not 
     make a grant or enter into a contract under this Act with an 
     entity unless the entity--
       ``(1) agrees to establish such procedures for fiscal 
     control and fund accounting as the Secretary determines are 
     necessary to ensure proper disbursement and accounting with 
     respect to the grant or contract;
       ``(2) agrees to ensure the confidentiality of records 
     maintained on individuals receiving health services under the 
     grant or contract;
       ``(3) with respect to providing health services to any 
     population of Native Hawaiians, a substantial portion of 
     which has a limited ability to speak the English language--
       ``(A) has developed and has the ability to carry out a 
     reasonable plan to provide health services under the grant or 
     contract through individuals who are able to communicate with 
     the population involved in the language and cultural context 
     that is most appropriate; and
       ``(B) has designated at least 1 individual who is fluent in 
     English and the appropriate language to assist in carrying 
     out the plan;
       ``(4) with respect to health services that are covered 
     under a program under title XVIII, XIX, or XXI of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.) (including any State 
     plan), or under any other Federal health insurance plan--
       ``(A) if the entity will provide under the grant or 
     contract any of those health services directly--
       ``(i) has entered into a participation agreement under each 
     such plan; and
       ``(ii) is qualified to receive payments under the plan; and
       ``(B) if the entity will provide under the grant or 
     contract any of those health services through a contract with 
     an organization--
       ``(i) ensures that the organization has entered into a 
     participation agreement under each such plan; and
       ``(ii) ensures that the organization is qualified to 
     receive payments under the plan; and
       ``(5) agrees to submit to the Secretary and Papa Ola Lokahi 
     an annual report that--
       ``(A) describes the use and costs of health services 
     provided under the grant or contract (including the average 
     cost of health services per user); and
       ``(B) provides such other information as the Secretary 
     determines to be appropriate.
       ``(d) Contract Evaluation.--
       ``(1) Determination of noncompliance.--If, as a result of 
     evaluations conducted by the Secretary, the Secretary 
     determines that an entity has not complied with or 
     satisfactorily performed a contract entered into under 
     section 7, the Secretary shall, before renewing the 
     contract--
       ``(A) attempt to resolve the areas of noncompliance or 
     unsatisfactory performance; and
       ``(B) modify the contract to prevent future occurrences of 
     the noncompliance or unsatisfactory performance.
       ``(2) Nonrenewal.--If the Secretary determines that the 
     noncompliance or unsatisfactory performance described in 
     paragraph (1) with respect to an entity cannot be resolved 
     and prevented in the future, the Secretary--
       ``(A) shall not renew the contract with the entity; and
       ``(B) may enter into a contract under section 7 with 
     another entity referred to in section 7(a)(3) that provides 
     services to the same population of Native Hawaiians served by 
     the entity the contract with which was not renewed by reason 
     of this paragraph.
       ``(3) Consideration of results.--In determining whether to 
     renew a contract entered into with an entity under this Act, 
     the Secretary shall consider the results of the evaluations 
     conducted under this section.
       ``(4) Application of federal laws.--Each contract entered 
     into by the Secretary under this Act shall be in accordance 
     with all Federal contracting laws (including regulations), 
     except that, in the discretion of the Secretary, such a 
     contract may--
       ``(A) be negotiated without advertising; and
       ``(B) be exempted from subchapter III of chapter 31, United 
     States Code.

[[Page 1038]]

       ``(5) Payments.--A payment made under any contract entered 
     into under this Act--
       ``(A) may be made--
       ``(i) in advance;
       ``(ii) by means of reimbursement; or
       ``(iii) in installments; and
       ``(B) shall be made on such conditions as the Secretary 
     determines to be necessary to carry out this Act.
       ``(e) Report.--
       ``(1) In general.--For each fiscal year during which an 
     entity receives or expends funds under a grant or contract 
     under this Act, the entity shall submit to the Secretary and 
     to Papa Ola Lokahi an annual report that describes--
       ``(A) the activities conducted by the entity under the 
     grant or contract;
       ``(B) the amounts and purposes for which Federal funds were 
     expended; and
       ``(C) such other information as the Secretary may request.
       ``(2) Audits.--The reports and records of any entity 
     concerning any grant or contract under this Act shall be 
     subject to audit by--
       ``(A) the Secretary;
       ``(B) the Inspector General of the Department of Health and 
     Human Services; and
       ``(C) the Comptroller General of the United States.
       ``(f) Annual Private Audit.--The Secretary shall allow as a 
     cost of any grant made or contract entered into under this 
     Act the cost of an annual private audit conducted by a 
     certified public accountant to carry out this section.

     ``SEC. 10. ASSIGNMENT OF PERSONNEL.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary may enter into an 
     agreement with Papa Ola Lokahi or any of the Native Hawaiian 
     health care systems for the assignment of personnel of the 
     Department of Health and Human Services with relevant 
     expertise for the purpose of--
       ``(1) conducting research; or
       ``(2) providing comprehensive health promotion and disease 
     prevention services and health services to Native Hawaiians.
       ``(b) Applicable Federal Personnel Provisions.--Any 
     assignment of personnel made by the Secretary under any 
     agreement entered into under subsection (a) shall be treated 
     as an assignment of Federal personnel to a local government 
     that is made in accordance with subchapter VI of chapter 33 
     of title 5, United States Code.

     ``SEC. 11. NATIVE HAWAIIAN HEALTH SCHOLARSHIPS AND 
                   FELLOWSHIPS.

       ``(a) Eligibility.--Subject to the availability of amounts 
     appropriated under subsection (c), the Secretary shall 
     provide to Papa Ola Lokahi, through a direct grant or a 
     cooperative agreement, funds for the purpose of providing 
     scholarship and fellowship assistance, counseling, and 
     placement service assistance to students who are Native 
     Hawaiians.
       ``(b) Priority.--A priority for scholarships under 
     subsection (a) may be provided to employees of--
       ``(1) the Native Hawaiian Health Care Systems; and
       ``(2) the Native Hawaiian Health Centers.
       ``(c) Terms and Conditions.--
       ``(1) Scholarship assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--The scholarship assistance under 
     subsection (a) shall be provided in accordance with 
     subparagraphs (B) through (G).
       ``(B) Need.--The provision of scholarships in each type of 
     health profession training shall correspond to the need for 
     each type of health professional to serve the Native Hawaiian 
     community in providing health services, as identified by Papa 
     Ola Lokahi.
       ``(C) Eligible applicants.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, the Secretary shall select scholarship 
     recipients from a list of eligible applicants submitted by 
     Papa Ola Lokahi.
       ``(D) Obligated service requirement.--
       ``(i) In general.--An obligated service requirement for 
     each scholarship recipient (except for a recipient receiving 
     assistance under paragraph (2)) shall be fulfilled through 
     service, in order of priority, in--

       ``(I) any of the Native Hawaiian health care systems;
       ``(II) any of the Native Hawaiian health centers;
       ``(III) 1 or more health professions shortage areas, 
     medically underserved areas, or geographic areas or 
     facilities similarly designated by the Public Health Service 
     in the State;
       ``(IV) a Native Hawaiian organization that serves a 
     geographical area, facility, or organization that serves a 
     significant Native Hawaiian population;
       ``(V) any public agency or nonprofit organization providing 
     services to Native Hawaiians; or
       ``(VI) any of the uniformed services of the United States.

       ``(ii) Assignment.--The placement service for a scholarship 
     shall assign each Native Hawaiian scholarship recipient to 1 
     or more appropriate sites for service in accordance with 
     clause (i).
       ``(E) Counseling, retention, and support services.--The 
     provision of academic and personal counseling, retention and 
     other support services--
       ``(i) shall not be limited to scholarship recipients under 
     this section; and
       ``(ii) shall be made available to recipients of other 
     scholarship and financial aid programs enrolled in 
     appropriate health professions training programs.
       ``(F) Financial assistance.--After consultation with Papa 
     Ola Lokahi, financial assistance may be provided to a 
     scholarship recipient during the period that the recipient is 
     fulfilling the service requirement of the recipient in any 
     of--
       ``(i) the Native Hawaiian health care systems; or
       ``(ii) the Native Hawaiians health centers.
       ``(G) Distance learning recipients.--A scholarship may be 
     provided to a Native Hawaiian who is enrolled in an 
     appropriate distance learning program offered by an 
     accredited educational institution.
       ``(2) Fellowships.--
       ``(A) In general.--Papa Ola Lokahi may provide financial 
     assistance in the form of a fellowship to a Native Hawaiian 
     health professional who is--
       ``(i) a Native Hawaiian community health representative, 
     outreach worker, or health program administrator in a 
     professional training program;
       ``(ii) a Native Hawaiian providing health services; or
       ``(iii) a Native Hawaiian enrolled in a certificated 
     program provided by traditional Native Hawaiian healers in 
     any of the traditional Native Hawaiian healing practices 
     (including lomi-lomi, la`au lapa`au, and ho`oponopono).
       ``(B) Types of assistance.--Assistance under subparagraph 
     (A) may include a stipend for, or reimbursement for costs 
     associated with, participation in a program described in that 
     paragraph.
       ``(3) Rights and benefits.--An individual who is a health 
     professional designated in section 338A of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254l) who receives a scholarship under 
     this subsection while fulfilling a service requirement under 
     that Act shall retain the same rights and benefits as members 
     of the National Health Service Corps during the period of 
     service.
       ``(4) No inclusion of assistance in gross income.--
     Financial assistance provided under this section shall be 
     considered to be qualified scholarships for the purpose of 
     section 117 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out subsections (a) and (c)(2) for each of fiscal years 
     2006 through 2011.

     ``SEC. 12. REPORT.

       ``For each fiscal year, the President shall, at the time at 
     which the budget of the United States is submitted under 
     section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, submit to 
     Congress a report on the progress made in meeting the 
     purposes of this Act, including--
       ``(1) a review of programs established or assisted in 
     accordance with this Act; and
       ``(2) an assessment of and recommendations for additional 
     programs or additional assistance necessary to provide, at a 
     minimum, health services to Native Hawaiians, and ensure a 
     health status for Native Hawaiians, that are at a parity with 
     the health services available to, and the health status of, 
     the general population.

     ``SEC. 13. USE OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES AND SOURCES 
                   OF SUPPLY.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall permit an 
     organization that enters into a contract or receives grant 
     under this Act to use in carrying out projects or activities 
     under the contract or grant all existing facilities under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary (including all equipment of the 
     facilities), in accordance with such terms and conditions as 
     may be agreed on for the use and maintenance of the 
     facilities or equipment.
       ``(b) Donation of Property.--The Secretary may donate to an 
     organization that enters into a contract or receives grant 
     under this Act, for use in carrying out a project or activity 
     under the contract or grant, any personal or real property 
     determined to be in excess of the needs of the Department or 
     the General Services Administration.
       ``(c) Acquisition of Surplus Property.--The Secretary may 
     acquire excess or surplus Federal Government personal or real 
     property for donation to an organization under subsection (b) 
     if the Secretary determines that the property is appropriate 
     for use by the organization for the purpose for which a 
     contract entered into or grant received by the organization 
     is authorized under this Act.

     ``SEC. 14. DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       ``(a) Authority and Areas of Interest.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with Papa 
     Ola Lokahi, may allocate amounts made available under this 
     Act, or any other Act, to carry out Native Hawaiian 
     demonstration projects of national significance.
       ``(2) Areas of interest.--A demonstration project described 
     in paragraph (1) may relate to such areas of interest as--
       ``(A) the development of a centralized database and 
     information system relating to the health care status, health 
     care needs, and wellness of Native Hawaiians;
       ``(B) the education of health professionals, and other 
     individuals in institutions of higher learning, in health and 
     allied health programs in healing practices, including Native 
     Hawaiian healing practices;

[[Page 1039]]

       ``(C) the integration of Western medicine with 
     complementary healing practices, including traditional Native 
     Hawaiian healing practices;
       ``(D) the use of telehealth and telecommunications in--
       ``(i) chronic and infectious disease management; and
       ``(ii) health promotion and disease prevention;
       ``(E) the development of appropriate models of health care 
     for Native Hawaiians and other indigenous people, including--
       ``(i) the provision of culturally competent health 
     services;
       ``(ii) related activities focusing on wellness concepts;
       ``(iii) the development of appropriate kupuna care 
     programs; and
       ``(iv) the development of financial mechanisms and 
     collaborative relationships leading to universal access to 
     health care; and
       ``(F) the establishment of--
       ``(i) a Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence for Nursing at 
     the University of Hawaii at Hilo;
       ``(ii) a Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence for Mental 
     Health at the University of Hawaii at Manoa;
       ``(iii) a Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence for Maternal 
     Health and Nutrition at the Waimanalo Health Center;
       ``(iv) a Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence for Research, 
     Training, Integrated Medicine at Molokai General Hospital; 
     and
       ``(v) a Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence for 
     Complementary Health and Health Education and Training at the 
     Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center.
       ``(3) Centers of excellence.--Papa Ola Lokahi, and any 
     centers established under paragraph (2)(F), shall be 
     considered to be qualified as Centers of Excellence under 
     sections 485F and 903(b)(2)(A) of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 287c-32, 299a-1).
       ``(b) Nonreduction in Other Funding.--The allocation of 
     funds for demonstration projects under subsection (a) shall 
     not result in any reduction in funds required by the Native 
     Hawaiian health care systems, the Native Hawaiian Health 
     Centers, the Native Hawaiian Health Scholarship Program, or 
     Papa Ola Lokahi to carry out the respective responsibilities 
     of those entities under this Act.

     ``SEC. 15. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       ``Nothing in this Act restricts the authority of the State 
     to require licensing of, and issue licenses to, health 
     practitioners.

     ``SEC. 16. COMPLIANCE WITH BUDGET ACT.

       ``Any new spending authority described in subparagraph (A) 
     or (B) of section 401(c)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act 
     of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 651(c)(2)) that is provided under this Act 
     shall be effective for any fiscal year only to such extent or 
     in such amounts as are provided for in Acts of appropriation.

     ``SEC. 17. SEVERABILITY.

       ``If any provision of this Act, or the application of any 
     such provision to any person or circumstance, is determined 
     by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the 
     remainder of this Act, and the application of the provision 
     to a person or circumstance other than that to which the 
     provision is held invalid, shall not be affected by that 
     holding.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INOUYE:
  S. 216. A bill for the relief of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada for 
settlement of certain claims against the United States; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, almost ten years ago, I stood before you 
to introduce a bill ``to provide an opportunity for the Pottawatomi 
Nation in Canada to have the merits of their claims against the United 
States determined by the United States Court of Federal Claims.''
  That bill was introduced as Senate Resolution 223, which referred the 
Pottawatomi's claim to the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal 
Claims and required the Chief Judge to report back to the Senate and 
provide sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law to enable 
the Congress to determine whether the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation 
in Canada is legal or equitable in nature, and the amount of damages, 
if any, which may be legally or equitably due from the United States.
  Five years ago, the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims 
reported back that the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has a legitimate 
and credible legal claim. Thereafter, by settlement stipulation, the 
United States has taken the position that it would be ``fair, just and 
equitable'' to settle the claims of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada 
for the sum of $1,830,000. This settlement amount was reached by the 
parties after seven years of extensive, fact-intensive litigation. 
Independently, the court concluded that the settlement amount is ``not 
a gratuity'' and that the ``settlement was predicated on a credible 
legal claim.'' Pottawatomi Nation in Canada, et al. v. United States, 
Cong. Ref. 94-1037X at 28 (Ct. Fed. Cl., September 15, 2000) (Report of 
Hearing Officer).
  The bill I introduce today is to authorize the appropriation of those 
funds that the United States has concluded would be ``fair, just and 
equitable'' to satisfy this legal claim. If enacted, this bill will 
finally achieve a measure of justice for a tribal nation that has for 
far too long been denied.
  For the information of our colleagues, this is the historical 
background that informs the underlying legal claim of the Canadian 
Pottawatomi.
  The members of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada are one of the 
descendant groups--successors-in-interest--of the historical 
Pottawatomi Nation and their claim originates in the latter part of the 
18th century. The historical Pottawatomi Nation was aboriginal to the 
United States. They occupied and possessed a vast expanse in what is 
now the States of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, llinois, and Wisconsin. From 
1795 to 1833, the United States annexed most of the traditional land of 
the Pottawatomi Nation through a series of treaties of cession--many of 
these cessions were made under extreme duress and the threat of 
military action. In exchange, the Pottawatomis were repeatedly made 
promises that the remainder of their lands would be secure and, in 
addition, that the United States would pay certain annuities to the 
Pottawatomi.
  In 1829, the United States formally adopted a Federal the policy of 
removal--an effort to remove all Indian tribes from their traditional 
lands east of the Mississippi River to the west. As part of that 
effort, the government increasingly pressured the Pottawatomis to cede 
the remainder of their traditional lands--some five million acres in 
and around the city of Chicago and remove themselves west. For years, 
the Pottawatomis steadfastly refused to cede the remainder of their 
tribal territory. Then in 1833, the United States, pressed by settlers 
seeking more land, sent a Treaty Commission to the Pottawatomi with 
orders to extract a cession of the remaining lands. The Treaty 
Commissioners spent 2 weeks using extraordinarily coercive tactics--
including threats of war--in an attempt to get the Pottawatomis to 
agree to cede their territory. Finally, those Pottawatomis who were 
present relented and on September 26, 1933, they ceded their remaining 
tribal estate through what would be known as the Treaty of Chicago. 
Seventy-seven members of the Pottawatomi Nation signed the Treaty of 
Chicago. Members of the ``Wisconsin Band'' were not present and did not 
assent to the cession.
  In exchange for their land, the Treaty of Chicago provided that the 
United States would give to the Pottawatomis 5 million acres of 
comparable land in what is now Missouri. The Pottawatomi were familiar 
with the Missouri land, aware that it was similar to their homeland. 
But the Senate refused to ratify that negotiated agreement and 
unilaterally switched the land to five million acres in Iowa. The 
Treaty Commissioners were sent back to acquire Pottawatomi assent to 
the Iowa land. All but seven of the original 77 signatories refused to 
accept the change even with promises that if they were dissatisfied 
``justice would be done.'' Treaty of Chicago, as amended, Article 4. 
Nevertheless, the Treaty of Chicago was ratified as amended by the 
Senate in 1834. Subsequently, the Pottawatomis sent a delegation to 
evaluate the land in Iowa. The delegation reported back that the land 
was ``not fit for snakes to live on.''
  While some Pottawatomis removed westward, many of the Pottawatomis--
particularly the Wisconsin Band, whose leaders never agreed to the 
Treaty--refused to do so. By 1836, the United States began to 
forcefully remove Pottawatomis who remained in the east--with 
devastating consequences. As is true with many other American Indian 
tribes, the forced removal westward came at great human cost. Many of 
the Pottawatomi were forcefully removed by mercenaries who were paid

[[Page 1040]]

on a per capita basis government contract. Over one-half of the Indians 
removed by these means died en route. Those who reached Iowa were 
almost immediately removed further to inhospitable parts of Kansas 
against their will and without their consent.
  Knowing of these conditions, many of the Pottawatomis including most 
of those in the Wisconsin Band vigorously resisted forced removal. To 
avoid Federal troops and mercenaries, much of the Wisconsin Band 
ultimately found it necessary to flee to Canada. They were often 
pursued to the border by government troops, government-paid mercenaries 
or both. Official files of the Canadian and United States governments 
disclose that many Pottawatomis were forced to leave their homes 
without their horses or any of their possessions other than the clothes 
on their backs.
  By the late 1830s, the government refused payment of annuities to any 
Pottawatomi groups that had not removed west. In the 1860s, members of 
the Wisconsin Band--those still in their traditional territory and 
those forced to flee to Canada--petitioned Congress for the payment of 
their treaty annuities promised under the Treaty of Chicago and all 
other cession treaties. By the Act of June 25, 1864 (13 Stat. 172) the 
Congress declared that the Wisconsin Band did not forfeit their 
annuities by not removing and directed that the share of the 
Pottawatomi Indians who had refused to relocate to the west should be 
retained for their use in the United States Treasury. (H.R. Rep. No. 
470, 64th Cong., p. 5, as quoted on page 3 of memo dated October 7, 
1949). Nevertheless, much of the money was never paid to the Wisconsin 
Band.
  In 1903, the Wisconsin Band--most of whom now resided in three areas, 
the States of Michigan and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario--
petitioned the Senate once again to pay them their fair portion of 
annuities as required by the law and treaties. (Sen. Doc. No. 185, 57th 
Cong., 2d Sess.) By the Act of June 21, 1906 (34 Stat. 380), the 
Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to investigate claims 
made by the Wisconsin Band and establish a roll of the Wisconsin Band 
Pottawatomis that still remained in the East. In addition, the Congress 
ordered the Secretary to determine ``the[] [Wisconsin Bands] 
proportionate shares of the annuities, trust funds, and other moneys 
paid to or expended for the tribe to which they belong in which the 
claimant Indians have not shared, [and] the amount of such monies 
retained in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the 
clamant Indians as directed the provision of the Act of June 25, 
1864.''
  In order to carry out the 1906 Act, the Secretary of Interior 
directed Dr. W.M. Wooster to conduct an enumeration of Wisconsin Band 
Pottawatomi in both the United States and Canada. Dr. Wooster 
documented 2007 Wisconsin Pottawatomis: 457 in Wisconsin and Michigan 
and 1550 in Canada. He also concluded that the proportionate share of 
annuities for the Pottawatomis in Wisconsin and Michigan was $477,339 
and that the proportionate share of annuities due the Pottawatomi 
Nation in Canada was $1,517,226. The Congress thereafter enacted a 
series of appropriation Acts from June 30, 1913 to May 29, 1928 to 
satisfy most of money owed to those Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis 
residing in the United States. However, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis 
who resided in Canada were never paid their share of the tribal funds.
  Since that time, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has diligently and 
continuously sought to enforce their treaty rights, although until this 
congressional reference, they had never been provided their day in 
court. In 1910, the United States and Great Britain entered into an 
agreement for the purpose of dealing with claims between both 
countries, including claims of Indian tribes within their respective 
jurisdictions, by creating the Pecuniary Claims Tribunal. From 1910 to 
1938, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada diligently sought to have their 
claim heard in this international forum. Overlooked for more pressing 
international matters of the period, including the intervention of 
World War I, the Pottawatomis then came to the U.S. Congress for 
redress of their claim.
  In 1946, the Congress waived its sovereign immunity and established 
the Indian Claims Commission for the purpose of granting tribes their 
long-delayed day in court. The Indian Claims Commission Act (ICCA) 
granted the Commission jurisdiction over claims such as the type 
involved here. In 1948, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis from both sides 
of the border--brought suit together in the Indian Claims Commission 
for recovery of damages. Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., No. 28 
(Ind. Cl. Comm. Filed May 4, 1948). Unfortunately, the Indian Claims 
Commission dismissed Pottawatomi Nation in Canada's part of the claim 
ruling that the Commission had no jurisdiction to consider claims of 
Indians living outside territorial limits of the United States. 
Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., 115 Ct. Cl. 823 (1950). The claim 
of the Wisconsin Band residing in the United States that was filed in 
the Indian Claims Commission was finally decided in favor of the 
Wisconsin Band by the U.S. Claims Court in 1983. Hannahville Indian 
Community v. United States, 4 Ct. Cl. 445 (1983). The Court of Claims 
concluded that the Wisconsin Band was owed a member's proportionate 
share of unpaid annuities from 1838 through 1907 due under various 
treaties, including the Treaty of Chicago and entered judgment for the 
American Wisconsin Band Pottawato-
mis for any monies not paid. Still the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada was 
excluded because of the jurisdictional limits of the ICCA.
  Undaunted, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada came to the Senate and 
after careful consideration, we finally gave them their long-awaited 
day in court through the congressional reference process. The court has 
now reported back to us that their claim is meritorious and that the 
payment that this bill would make constitutes a ``fair, just and 
equitable'' resolution to this claim.
  The Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has sought justice for over 150 
years. They have done all that we asked in order to establish their 
claim. Now it is time for us to finally live up to the promise our 
government made so many years ago. It will not correct all the wrongs 
of the past, but it is a demonstration that this government is willing 
to admit when it has left unfulfilled an obligation and that the United 
States is willing to do what we can to see that justice--so long 
delayed is not now denied.
  Finally, I would just note that the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation 
in Canada is supported through specific resolutions by the National 
Congress of American Indians (the oldest, largest and most-
representative tribal organization here in the United States), the 
Assembly of First Nations (which includes all recognized tribal 
entities in Canada), and each and every of the Pottawatomi tribal 
groups that remain in the United States today.
  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. 216

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

     SECTION 1. SETTLEMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS.

       (a) Authorization for Payment.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of 
     the Treasury shall pay to the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada 
     $1,830,000 from amounts appropriated under section 1304 of 
     title 31, United States Code.
       (b) Payment in Accordance With Stipulation for 
     Recommendation of Settlement.--The payment under subsection 
     (a) shall--
       (1) be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of 
     the Stipulation for Recommendation of Settlement dated May 
     22, 2000, entered into between the Pottawatomi Nation in 
     Canada and the United States (referred to in this Act as the 
     ``Stipulation for Recommendation of Settlement''); and
       (2) be included in the report of the Chief Judge of the 
     United States Court of Federal Claims regarding Congressional 
     Reference No. 94-1037X, submitted to the Senate on January 4, 
     2001, in accordance with sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28, 
     United States Code.
       (c) Full Satisfaction of Claims.--The payment under 
     subsection (a) shall be in full satisfaction of all claims of 
     the Pottawatomi

[[Page 1041]]

     Nation in Canada against the United States that are referred 
     to or described in the Stipulation for Recommendation of 
     Settlement.
       (d) Nonapplicability.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, the Indian Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) does not apply to the payment 
     under subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, 
        Ms. Collins, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Grassley, Mr. 
        Jeffords, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Leahy, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Pryor, Mr. 
        Levin, and Mr. Specter):
  S. 217. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to preserve the 
essential air service program; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today with 13 other Senators to 
introduce the bipartisan Essential Air Service Preservation Act of 
2005. I am pleased to have my colleague Senator Snowe as the principal 
cosponsor of the bill. Senator Snowe has been a long-time champion of 
commercial air service in rural areas, and I appreciate her continued 
leadership on this important legislation. Senators Ben Nelson, Collins, 
Rockefeller, Harkin, Grassley, Jeffords, Schumer, Leahy, Clinton, 
Pryor, Levin, and Specter are also cosponsors of the bill.
  Congress established the Essential Air Service Program in 1978 to 
ensure that communities that had commercial air service before airline 
deregulation could continue to receive scheduled service. Without EAS, 
many rural communities would have no commercial air service at all.
  Our bill is very simple. It preserves Congress' intent in the 
Essential Air Service program by repealing a provision in the 2003 FAA 
reauthorization bill that would for the first time require communities 
to pay for their commercial air service. The legislation that imposed 
mandatory cost sharing on communities to retain their commercial air 
service had been stricken from both the House and Senate versions of 
the FAA reauthorization bill, but was reinserted by conferees. I 
believe that any program that forces communities to pay to continue to 
receive their commercial air service could well be the first step in 
the total elimination of scheduled air service for many rural 
communities.
  Two times since mandatory cost sharing was enacted Congress has 
blocked it from being implemented. For fiscal years 2004 and 2005, a 
bipartisan group of senators included language in the Department of 
Transportation's appropriations act that bars the use of funds to 
implement any mandatory cost sharing program. This bill would simply 
make Congress' ongoing ban permanent.
  All across America, small communities face ever-increasing hurdles to 
promoting their economic growth and development. Today, many rural 
areas lack access to interstate or even four-lane highways, railroads 
or broadband telecommunications. Business development in rural areas 
frequently hinges on the availability of scheduled air service. For 
small communities, commercial air service provides a critical link to 
the national and international transportation system.
  The Essential Air Service Program currently ensures commercial air 
service to over 100 communities in thirty-four states. EAS supports an 
additional 33 communities in Alaska. Because of increasing costs and 
the continuing financial turndown in the aviation industry, 
particularly among commuter airlines, about 28 additional communities 
have been forced into the EAS program since the terrorist attacks in 
2001.
  In my State of New Mexico, five cities currently rely on EAS for 
their commercial air service. The communities are Clovis, Hobbs, 
Carlsbad, Alamogordo and my hometown of Silver City. In each case 
commercial service is provided to Albuquerque, the state's business 
center and largest city.
  I believe this ill-conceived proposal requiring cities to pay to 
continue to have commercial air service could not come at a worse time 
for small communities already facing depressed economies and declining 
tax revenues.
  As I understand it, the mandatory cost-sharing requirements in the 
FAA reauthorization bill could affect communities in as many as 22 
states. Based on an analysis by my staff, the individual cities that 
could be affected are as follows:

       Alabama--Muscle Shoals; Arizona--Prescott, Kingman; 
     Arkansas--Hot Springs, Harrison, Jonesboro; Colorado--Pueblo; 
     Georgia--Athens; Iowa--Fort Dodge, Burlington; Kansas--
     Salina; Kentucky--Owensboro; Maine--Augusta, Rockland; 
     Michigan--Iron Mt.; Mississippi Laurel; Missouri--Joplin, Ft. 
     Leonard Wood; New Hampshire--Lebanon; New Mexico--Hobbs, 
     Alamogordo, Clovis; New York--Watertown, Jamestown, 
     Plattsburgh; Oklahoma--Ponca City, Enid; Pennsylvania--
     Johnstown, Oil City, Bradford, Altoona; South Dakota--
     Brookings, Watertown; Tennessee--Jackson; Texas--Victoria; 
     Vermont--Rutland; Washington--Moses Lake

  As I see it, the choice here is clear: If we do not preserve the 
Essential Air Service Program today, we could soon see the end of all 
commercial air service in rural areas. The EAS program provides vital 
resources that help link rural communities to the national and global 
aviation system. Our bill will preserve the essential air service 
program and help ensure that affordable, reliable, and safe air service 
remains available in rural America. Congress is already on record 
opposing mandatory cost sharing. I hope all Senators will once again 
join us in opposing this attack on rural America.
  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. 217

       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 ``Essential Air Service 
     Preservation Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF EAS LOCAL PARTICIPATION PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 417 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking section 41747, and 
     such title shall be applied as if such section 41747 had not 
     been enacted.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by striking the item 
     relating to section 41747.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KOHL:
  S. 218. A bill to amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to provide 
incentives to landowners to protect and improve streams and riparian 
habitat; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  MR. KOHL. Mr. President, there are a number of different conservation 
programs aimed at farmers, with a variety of goals. While many of those 
programs improve water quality and stream health, none are primarily 
focused with improving fish habitat. The bill I am introducing today 
would focus USDA conservation dollars on restoring high quality fish 
habitat in streams around rural America.
  While there are millions of miles of streams throughout the country, 
few of these streams are able to support the kind of first rate 
fisheries that they have in the past. Agriculture and industry have 
altered riverbeds over the years, slowing the movement of water for 
their own purposes. The EPA and the Fish and Wildlife Service have 
found that 81 percent of all stream fish habitats in the U.S. have been 
adversely affected by either pollution or other disturbances. In places 
where alterations in the river are no longer needed, they should be 
removed to restore the ecosystem for the native fish.
  Clean, fresh, fast moving streams are a necessary requirement for 
some of our most popular game fish. Trout, one of our most valuable and 
sought-after game fish, need very specific conditions to thrive, and 
those conditions have been harder and harder to find. Currently roughly 
2 percent of all freshwater fishes are either considered rare or at 
risk. Habitat loss is part of the problem with only 19 percent of 
streams and rivers in the lower 48 of high enough quality for wild or 
scenic status.
  This bill, the Stream Habitat Improvement Program, is about more than 
just preserving an ecosystem or building wildlife populations, this is

[[Page 1042]]

also about tourism and recreation. Fishing in this country is big 
business. In Wisconsin alone there are almost 950,000 anglers, and 
almost half a million more come from out of State to fish in Wisconsin. 
Together these anglers spend $1 billion on fishing related expenses in 
our State. Nationwide recreational fishing is related to $41 billion in 
economic activity. An industry with this much impact around the country 
deserves our consideration.
  The bill introduced today would provide payments to farmers who 
engage in conservation projects that improve stream health. The bill is 
based on the Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program, but focused more 
closely on streams, creeks, and rivers. Farmers who participate in the 
program will make improvements on streams running through their 
property. Improvements could include repairing shoreline, removing 
barriers to fish passage, and planting trees to shade the water and 
strengthen stream banks. Farmers who are willing to make the efforts to 
improve spawning grounds and add cover for fish can do a lot to 
rehabilitate this resource.
  Not every river and stream needs to be returned to its natural state, 
or be granted wild and scenic status. But this bill tries to take a 
small step toward repairing a resource for the future. Fishing, 
especially trout and fly fishing, are big business in this country, as 
well as important environmental indicators. Our efforts to further 
stream quality will have both economic benefits as well as natural 
ones, and those are the kind of efforts that everyone in Congress can 
get behind. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 218

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

     SECTION 1. STREAM HABITAT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 5 of subtitle D of title XII of 
     the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839bb et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 1240Q. STREAM HABITAT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     State technical committees established under section 1261, 
     shall establish within the Natural Resources Conservation 
     Service a program to be known as the stream habitat 
     improvement program (referred to in this section as the 
     `program').
       ``(b) Eligible Projects.--
       ``(1) In general.--Under the program, the Secretary shall 
     offer to enter into agreements under which the Secretary 
     shall make cost-share payments to landowners to carry out on 
     land owned by the landowners projects to--
       ``(A) protect streamside areas, including through the 
     installation of riparian fencing and improved stream 
     crossings;
       ``(B) repair in-stream habitat;
       ``(C) improve water flows and water quality, including 
     through channel restoration;
       ``(D) initiate watershed management and planning in areas 
     in which streams are in a degraded condition due to past 
     agricultural or forestry practices; and
       ``(E) undertake other types of stream habitat improvement 
     approved by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Priority projects.--The Secretary shall give priority 
     to any landowner applicant that carries out a project to--
       ``(A) remove a small dam or in-stream structure;
       ``(B) improve fish passage, including through culvert 
     repair and maintenance;
       ``(C) protect streamside areas;
       ``(D) improve water flows, including through irrigation 
     efficiency improvements; or
       ``(E) improve in-stream flow quality or timing or 
     temperature regimes.
       ``(3) Priority applicants.--To ensure that program projects 
     address the causes of stream habitat degradation, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to any landowner applicant that 
     demonstrates that upland improvements associated with the 
     stream habitat improvement (including erosion and nutrient 
     management) have been, or will be, carried out.
       ``(c) Cost-Share Payments.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), the Federal share of payments made under this section 
     shall be equal to 80 percent of the total cost incurred by 
     the landowner in carrying out a project described in 
     subsection (b), as determined and approved by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Nonprofit partnership.--The Secretary shall provide a 
     higher Federal share of payments than the share provided 
     under paragraph (1) to a landowner that carries out a project 
     in partnership with a nonprofit organization.
       ``(3) Priority projects.--The Secretary may provide a 
     higher Federal share of payments than the share provided 
     under paragraph (1) to a landowner that carries out a project 
     described in subsection (b)(2).''.
       (b) Funding and Technical Assistance.--
       (1) Funding.--Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(8) The stream habitat improvement program under section 
     1240Q, using, to the maximum extent practicable, $60,000,000 
     in each of fiscal years 2006 through 2008.''.
       (2) Technical assistance.--Section 1241(b)(1) of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(b)(1) is amended by 
     striking ``paragraphs (1) through (7)'' and inserting 
     ``paragraphs (1) through (8)''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 219. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the 
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to protect the 
retirement security of American workers by ensuring that pension assets 
are adequately diversified and by providing workers with adequate 
access to, and information about, their pension plans, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today along with my colleague, 
Senator Baucus, the Ranking Member of the Finance Committee, to re-
introduce the National Employee Savings and Trust Equity Guarantee 
Act--or the NESTEG bill as we call it in the Finance Committee. The 
NESTEG bill would reform our pension and retirement savings laws in 
several important ways. For example, NESTEG would require companies to 
allow their employees to diversify out of company stock, a provision 
that the Committee adopted in response to the events at Enron which saw 
employees' retirement plans vanish almost over night. The NESTEG bill 
also includes other important participant protections, including 
enhanced disclosure requirements, new rules governing so-called 
blackout periods, and faster vesting of employer contributions. In 
addition, NESTEG expands the portability of retirement plan assets so 
that workers can keep money saved for retirement, and simplifies 
pension laws and regulation. The NESTEG bill also responds to the 
uncertainty in the rules governing defined benefit pensions by 
permanently adopting the yield curve as a replacement for the 30-year 
Treasury rate.
  Last year, the Finance Committee unanimously approved the NESTEG 
bill. This year, I am looking forward to seeing it signed into law. 
This bill first began in the wake of the outrageous events that went on 
in the wake of the collapse of Enron and corporate scandals at other 
companies. Over the past few years, the Finance Committee has worked 
diligently to enact reforms in a number of areas of the law to make 
sure that events like that don't happen again.
  The important pension protections in the NESTEG bill are one 
remaining area for reform. The headlines have died down, but workers' 
pensions are still too vulnerable to company failures. Thus, a central 
piece of this bill would allow employees to diversify their retirement 
plans so that they are not overly concentrated in company stock. 
Diversification is one of the hallmark principles of sound investment 
strategy, and promoting diversification should be a hallmark of our 
pension laws.
  But the NESTEG bill is not just a bill that responds to Enron-like 
situations. The NESTEG bill includes other important improvements to 
401(k) and other defined contribution plans as well. The bill makes it 
easier for employees to transfer amounts from one plan to another, 
thereby making sure that plan assets remain saved for retirement. And 
the bill includes provisions designed to make it easier and more cost 
effective for small businesses to sponsor a retirement plan. Small 
businesses are vital to our economy, and we need to encourage a level 
playing field so that workers at small businesses throughout our 
country have the same access to retirement plans as workers at Fortune 
500 companies.
  The NESTEG bill also would remove a major source of uncertainty 
plaguing our pension system by enacting the yield curve as a permanent 
replacement to the 30-year Treasury rate for

[[Page 1043]]

pension funding. Workers need reliable pension funding, and employers 
need a reliable basis on which to calculate pension payments. The 
NESTEG bill also gives plan sponsors more flexibility to fund their 
plans well in good times, and restricts the ability of companies with 
severely underfunded plans to promise more benefits to work. The 
Administration has recently come forward with additional pension 
funding reform proposals, and I look forward to examining those reforms 
as the Finance Committee considers legislation in this area this year.
  Retirement security is a topic that is going to get a great deal of 
attention this year. We know we need to increase long-term savings in 
America, and we know that there are ways that we can improve our 
private retirement system. The reforms in the NESTEG bill that I am 
introducing today with Senator Baucus represent an important step 
forward in improving Americans' retirement security. As we debate 
retirement security issues this year, I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to achieve the goal of ensuring that all Americans achieve a 
secure retirement.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my good friend 
Senator Grassley, the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, in 
introducing the National Employee Savings and Trust Equity Guarantee 
Act.
  Senator Grassley and I have attempted put together a bipartisan bill 
to improve the security of the pension plans that cover America's 
workers. The Finance Committee approved similar legislation in the last 
Congress. Some of the provisions in this bill that provide participant 
protections were in a bill we introduced in the 107th Congress--a bill 
designed to help us avoid another Enron retirement plan debacle.
  We all remember Enron. Thousands of workers lost their jobs. Because 
their 401(k) accounts were heavily invested in company stock, these 
workers lost most of their retirement savings as well. While the story 
of Enron's employees is no longer new, others companies unfortunately 
have risen up, or fallen down, to take Enron's place.
  This country is in the middle of a discussion about retirement 
security. The administration is recommending that we introduce 
investment risk into the Social Security system--a system that is the 
sole source of retirement income for one-fifth of our senior citizens, 
and the primary source for almost two-thirds of seniors. Before we 
introduce risk into Social Security, the bedrock of our retirement 
system, we need to take a hard look at how we can reduce risk to 
participants in the private retirement system. That is what this bill 
is about.
  Pension legislation is challenging. Companies offer plans 
voluntarily. If we value employer-sponsored retirement plans--and I 
do--we need to be careful not to make them so burdensome that companies 
will stop offering them. At the same time, workers have the right to 
basic protections to make sure that the money that they are counting on 
for retirement is really there when the time comes.
  I believe that this bill strikes that balance. It phases out the 
ability companies have to keep workers locked into company stock in 
their retirement plans. But it does not limit those workers' ability to 
invest in that stock if they decide that doing so is best for them.
  To help make that decision, we give workers tools to make good 
decisions, and really understand the consequences of their actions. We 
require the issuance of benefit statements so workers know how much 
their accounts are worth and how much company stock they already own. 
And we provide a safe harbor to make it easier for employers to make 
independent investment advice available if they want to.
  The challenge inherent in legislating for a voluntary pension system 
is particularly sensitive when the subject is defined benefit plan 
funding. When we discuss and debate funding proposals, we need to 
consider the health of PBGC, the participants who are counting on 
defined benefit pensions and the employers who have been willing to 
promise these benefits.
  The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation insures defined benefit 
plans covering forty-four million Americans. As recently as 2001, PBGC 
had a projected surplus. Now PBGC has a projected deficit of $23 
billion. And this deficit represents unfunded guaranteed benefits. 
Sadly, many participants were promised benefits in excess of those 
guaranteed by PBGC. These participants planned their retirement around 
a benefit promise, only to have the rug pulled out from under them. We 
must strengthen the funding of defined benefit pension plans so 
promises made can be kept. This bill takes some important steps toward 
this goal.
  First, this bill provides a permanent replacement for the 30-year 
Treasury rate used to calculate minimum funding requirements for 
defined benefit plans. Congress passed a temporary substitute last 
year, but our temporary fix expires at the end of this year. This bill 
would extend the current corporate bond rate for an additional year, 
and then begin phasing in the yield curve--a set of rates that 
recognizes that you will get a different interest rate on a 5-year loan 
than on a 15-year loan.
  This bill increases the deductible limit on company contributions to 
defined benefit pension plans. This is so critical. We must allow 
companies to contribute more in good times, to build a cushion for bad 
times.
  Under this bill, plans of financially-distressed companies that are 
less than 50 percent funded would not be allowed to continue promising 
additional benefits until either the funding improves, or the company's 
financial footing is more solid. This is a tough provision. But we have 
to make sure that employees receive benefits that they have earned. We 
have to do our best to make companies pay for promises they have made. 
But when a company cannot pay for more promises, we must be willing to 
step in and say ``No more promises.''
  This bill has a number of other provisions that will make it easier 
for a worker to move retirement plans from employer to employer, or 
from an employer plan to an IRA. There are also provisions that make it 
easier to administer retirement programs.
  I look forward to continuing to work with the Chairman of the Finance 
Committee, Senator Grassley, to see the National Employee Savings and 
Trust Equity Guarantee Act through to enactment. I urge my colleagues 
to join us in working toward a more secure retirement for millions of 
Americans.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. STABENOW (for herself, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Dayton, and Mr. Corzine):
  S. 222. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
stabilize the amount of the medicare part B premium; to the Committee 
on Finance.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Keep the 
Promise of Medicare Act'' of 2005, and am pleased to be joined by my 
colleagues Senators Kennedy, Boxer, Lautenberg, Rockefeller, Dayton, 
and Corzine.
  Our Medicare beneficiaries were greeted in the New Year by the 
largest premium increase in Medicare's history--17.5 percent. At the 
same time, the Social Security COLA increased by only 2.7 percent.
  What are the implications of such a discrepancy? More than 2 million 
beneficiaries nationwide have lost their entire COLA to the Medicare 
premium increase, and almost 13 million seniors and disabled Americans 
will have over 50 percent of their COLA consumed by the Medicare 
premium increase.
  This dramatic increase could have been avoided--CMS Administrator 
McClellan has acknowledged that provisions included in the 2003 
Medicare law designed to privatize the program directly contributed to 
the premium increase.
  Therefore, my legislation will limit, retroactively, the 2005 Part B 
premium increase to the same level as the Social Security COLA. The 
result will be nearly a $10 monthly savings for our seniors--the Bush 
Administration has given seniors a monthly $78.20 premium; under our 
legislation the premium would be $68.40.
  Older Americans have been struggling under the relentless increases 
in

[[Page 1044]]

the cost of their health care and prescription drugs. Rather than 
alleviating the challenges they are facing, the 2005 premium increase 
has made their situation even direr.
  Adjusting the current premium is a first step, and one we must take 
immediately. Additionally, we should use this year to revise an 
outdated law that has led to record increase in Medicare premiums in 
the last four years. The promise of Medicare must include protection 
from dramatic increases in the Part B premium.
  I urge my colleagues to join me on this important piece of 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, 
        Mr. Levin, Mr. Dayton, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Stabenow, Ms. Mikulski, 
        Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. 
        Sarbanes):
  S. 223. A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to 
repeal any weakening of overtime protections and to avoid future loss 
of overtime protections due to inflation; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am here to introduce legislation and to 
talk about an issue that my colleagues have heard me speak about on 
numerous occasions during the course of the past two years, frequently 
at some length. That issue is overtime pay for American workers.
  It is a subject I feel deeply about. It has become very clear to me 
that Iowans feel very deeply about it, as well. Working families across 
the country feel deeply about it.
  I know that is true because people approach me and tell me what 
overtime pay means to them and their families. I have become associated 
with this fight here in Congress over protecting overtime pay, so when 
people recognize me, they very often will approach me and tell me a 
little bit about themselves and why they support my efforts on this 
issue. Many of them even become emotional about it.
  Why is that? Why do people feel so strongly? For some, it is a simple 
matter of fairness and valuing work. They believe that receiving time-
and-a-half pay when they put in more than 40 hours of work in a week is 
fair because if they are going to give up their premium time--hours 
beyond a normal workweek--then their employer should provide them with 
premium pay. It is simple fairness. Of course, they might also rely on 
that premium pay as a substantial part of their income. That is a 
benefit of valuing work fairly. They make more money.
  Most people making overtime pay are not extremely affluent, so they 
are probably spending a lot of that extra income, putting it right into 
the local economy. That is therefore a further benefit to the economy.
  Other people, to tell the truth, would rather not work a lot of 
overtime hours. They believe a 40-hour workweek is a full workweek.
  That is what the Fair Labor Standards Act, FLSA, did when we passed 
it in 1938. It established the principle of a 40-hour workweek in law 
by saying that employers need to pay extra when they work their 
employees longer than that. The time-and-a-half rule tends to 
discourage employers from requiring their employees to work longer than 
40 hours, and many people value the law for that reason. They want to 
keep their premium time for themselves. They want to spend their 
premium time doing leisure activities or performing important family 
duties.
  In 1938, our government decided that the 40-hour workweek was 
important to Americans. Look in any economic history book. It is 
treated as a fundamental and valuable principle in our economy. 
Overtime pay rewards work, and it reduces exploitation. It protects 
``premium time'' for working men and women.
  The 40-hour workweek says: Human beings are more than just the work 
they do. It says, the progress of technology can allow us to enjoy a 
good standard of living and quality of life without spending all of our 
hours toiling and laboring.
  The 40-hour workweek also creates jobs. Requiring time-and-a half pay 
for overtime work encourages employers to hire more workers, rather 
than requiring additional hours of work from existing employees. 
Franklin Roosevelt cited this as a rationale when he signed the FLSA 
into law.
  In 1933, probably for all the reasons I have just mentioned, the 
United States Senate voted 53 to 30 to set a cap for hours in a 
workweek. The number of hours was 30. The Senate voted to cap the 
workweek in the United States at 30 hours. Those were extremely 
difficult times economically, but the Senate of 70 years ago 
nonetheless placed a greater value on quality time spent off the job 
than they did increasing productivity with longer workweeks.
  The Bush rules are deeply flawed. They make millions of modest-income 
and moderate-income American workers vulnerable to losing their 
eligibility for overtime pay, broadening the categories of workers that 
are ineligible for overtime protections--often in response to specific 
requests from industries.
  If overtime is free to the employer, it is going to be overused. A 
study done by the Center for Women and Work at Rutgers University 
showed that only 20 percent of the workers eligible for overtime work 
more than 40 hours a week, but 44 percent of workers who are exempt 
from overtime pay work overtime.
  Several months ago, three former career DoL officials released a 
report after having done an in-depth review of these rule changes. 
Their analysis should be read by all to whom the issue of overtime is 
important.
  These were not just any three former DoL officials. These were the 
top three people who administered these regulations over the course of 
the last two decades. They speak with enormous credibility on this 
issue.
  These career employees have said that ``in every instance where DoL 
has made substantive changes to the existing rules, it has weakened the 
criteria for overtime exemptions and thereby expanded the reach and 
scope of the exemptions.'' This comes from people who were elevated to 
their high positions within DoL during the Reagan administration. The 
fact that they say these new rules are bad for the American worker in 
all ways but one ought to tell us something.
  All of my colleagues are well aware that I led fights on the Senate 
floor during the last Congress to block or repeal the Department of 
Labor's FLSA overtime rule changes. Despite the fact that Congress 
voted 6 times during that period to protect workers' overtime by 
blocking the new rules, the administration insisted on ignoring the 
will of Congress. The new rules went into effect on August 23 of last 
year.
  The bill I am introducing today would simply allow any workers who 
were entitled to overtime before the new rules took effect last August 
to retain their overtime rights. It makes ineffective those portions of 
the new rules that allow employers to take overtime eligibility away 
from workers who were eligible before the new rules took effect.
  Secondly, my bill would also increase the minimum salary threshold. 
The minimum salary threshold that helps define overtime eligibility had 
not been raised since 1975 before the Bush administration raised it to 
$23,660. The administration did not raise it high enough, and millions 
of workers who should be covered are not covered due to this 
inadequacy. This bill will increase the number of workers covered by 
overtime protections by raising the minimum salary threshold to 
$30,712--to correspond with the increase in workers' wages since 1975. 
The bill also contains language that requires the salary threshold be 
adjusted annually to reflect and keep pace with increases in inflation.
  American workers deserve an iron-clad guarantee that their overtime 
rights are safe. That is what the bipartisan bill I am introducing 
today accomplishes. It repeals any provisions of the new rules that 
took effect last August that weaken overtime protections, and it 
indexes the minimum salary threshold annually to avoid future loss of 
overtime protections due to inflation. I thank the 13 of my colleagues

[[Page 1045]]

who have agreed to cosponsor this for their support, and I look forward 
to adding more.
  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. 223

       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 ``Overtime Rights Protection 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938.

       Section 13 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 
     U.S.C. 213) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(k)(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subchapter II of 
     chapter 5 and chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code 
     (commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedures Act) 
     or any other provision of law, any portion of the final rule 
     promulgated on April 23, 2004, revising part 541 of title 29, 
     Code of Federal Regulations, that exempts from the overtime 
     pay provision of section 7 of this Act any employee who would 
     not otherwise be exempt if the regulations in effect on March 
     31, 2003 remained in effect, shall have no force or effect 
     and that portion of such regulations (as in effect on March 
     31, 2003) that would prevent such employee from being exempt 
     shall be reinstated.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall adjust the minimum salary level 
     for exemption under section 13(a)(1) in the following manner:
       ``(A) Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 
     this subsection, the Secretary shall increase the minimum 
     salary level for exemption under subsection (a)(1) for 
     executive, administrative, and managerial occupations from 
     the level of $155 per week in 1975 to $591 per week (an 
     amount equal to the increase in the Employment Cost Index 
     (published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics) for executive, 
     administrative, and managerial occupations between 1975 and 
     2005).
       ``(B) Not later than December 31 of the calendar year 
     following the increase required in subparagraph (A), and each 
     December 31 thereafter, the Secretary shall increase the 
     minimum salary level for exemption under subsection (a)(1) by 
     an amount equal to the increase in the Employment Cost Index 
     for executive, administrative, and managerial occupations for 
     the year involved.''.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I commend Senator Harkin for introducing 
the Overtime Rights Protection Act to restore overtime protections for 
the more than 6 million Americans denied overtime pay and denied the 
guarantee of a 40-hour work week by the Republican anti-overtime 
regulation adopted in 2004. The bill will also provide overtime 
protections for additional deserving workers.
  In the last Congress, the Senate voted four times to block the 
Administration's overtime rule, and the House voted twice to block it. 
Yet, the Republican leadership refused to accept the will of Congress 
and the will of the American people. Instead, it blocked the enactment 
of this legislation and continued the unfair assault on America's 
workers and their right to overtime pay.
  In today's economy, workers are concerned about losing their jobs, 
their pay, their health benefits, and their retirement benefits. Now 
more than six million employees also have to worry about losing higher 
pay they've always earned for working overtime.
  These men and women are nurses. They are school teachers. They are 
long-term care workers. They are assistants in mental health 
facilities. They are countless men and women in many other fields.
  Make no mistake--overtime cuts are pay cuts. When workers lose their 
overtime pay, they still work longer hours. But they get no extra pay 
for doing so, even though they've had the right to time-and-a-half pay 
for overtime work ever since the 1930s.
  Clearly, we need a policy to create more jobs, not eliminate jobs. By 
taking away workers' right to overtime, the Administration's rule 
undermines job creation, since it allows businesses to require 
employees to work longer hours for no extra pay, rather than hire new 
workers to do the extra work.
  Denying overtime pay is a thinly veiled scheme to reduce workers' pay 
and raise employers' profits. In this troubled economy, it makes no 
sense to ask any workers anywhere in America to give up their overtime 
pay.
  Instead of making hard-working men and women work longer hours for 
less pay, businesses should create new jobs by hiring more employees to 
do the work.
  We know that employees across America are already struggling hard to 
balance their family needs and their work responsibilities. Requiring 
them to work longer hours for less pay will impose an even greater 
burden in this daily struggle.
  According to the Families and Work Institute, two of the most 
important things that children would most like to change about their 
parents are that they wish their parents were less stressed out by 
their work, and they wish they could spend more time with their 
parents.
  The Government Accountability Office says that employees without 
overtime protection are twice as likely to work overtime as employees 
covered by the protection. In other words, businesses don't hesitate to 
demand longer hours, as long as they don't have to pay higher wages for 
the extra work.
  Protecting the 40-hour work week is vital to protecting the work-
family balance for millions of Americans in communities in all parts of 
the nation. The last thing Congress should be doing is to allow the new 
anti-overtime rule to make the balance worse for workers than it 
already is.
  Under the overtime law, low-income workers are supposed to be 
automatically included. But today, millions who should be included are 
left out, since wages have increased, but the maximum earnings level 
for automatic coverage has remained the same for 30 years. The Bush 
Administration raised it to $23,660 in their new rule, but this level 
is still too low. The Harkin bill will cover more workers by raising 
the threshold to $30,712, and index it to keep pace with wage growth. 
This change will bring it to the level it would be if we'd made annual 
adjustments for wage inflation over the last 30 years.
  Congress cannot look the other way while more and more Americans lose 
their jobs, their livelihoods, their homes, and their dignity. Denying 
overtime pay rubs salt in the wounds of this troubled economy. Enacting 
the Overtime Rights Protection Act will end this injustice, and I urge 
my colleagues to support it.

                          ____________________