[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1337-1356]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 257. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to provide 
grant eligibility for a State that adopts a program for the impoundment 
of vehicles operated by persons while under the influence of alcohol; 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, this legislation addresses the serious 
national problem of drunk driving by helping to ensure that when 
drunken drivers are arrested, they can't simply get back into their car 
and put the lives of others in jeopardy. This is based on original 
legislation, known as ``John's Law,'' that I introduced in the Senate 
in the 108th Congress and that has already been enacted at the State 
level in New Jersey. I am proud that Senator Lautenberg will be co-
sponsoring this legislation.
  On July 22, 2000, Navy Ensign John Elliott was driving home from the 
United States Naval Academy in Annapolis for his mother's birthday when 
his car was struck by another car. Both Ensign Elliott and the driver 
of that car were killed. The driver of the car that caused the 
collision had a blood alcohol level that exceeded twice the legal 
limit.
  What makes this tragedy especially distressing is that this same 
driver had been arrested and charged with driving under the influence 
of alcohol, DUI, just three hours before the crash. After being 
processed for that offense, he had been released into the custody of a 
friend who drove him back to his car and allowed him to get behind the 
wheel, with tragic results.
  We need to ensure that drunken drivers do not get back behind the 
wheel before they sober up. With this legislation, States would be 
allowed to use some of their drunk driver prevention grant money from 
the Federal Government to impound the vehicles of drunk drivers for no 
less than 12 hours. This would help ensure that a drunk driver cannot 
get back behind the wheel until he is sober. And that would make our 
roads safer, and prevent the loss of many innocent lives.
  Mr. President, 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. 257

       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 ``John's Law of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. ALCOHOL-IMPAIRED DRIVING COUNTERMEASURES.

       Section 410(b)(1) of title 23, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(H) Program for impoundment of vehicles.--A program to 
     impound a vehicle for no less than 12 hours that is operated 
     by a person who is arrested for operating the vehicle while 
     under the influence of alcohol.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 258. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to enhance 
research, training, and health information dissemination with respect 
to urologic diseases, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise along with Senator Dodd to 
introduce the Training and Research in Urology Act--also known as the 
TRU Act. During my career in the U.S. Senate, I have supported the 
successful effort to double National Institutes of Health (NIH) 
research funding and have provided a strong voice for our children.

[[Page 1338]]

This bill complements these past and continued efforts. It helps 
provide urologic scientists with the tools they need to find new cures 
for the many debilitating urologic diseases impacting men, women, and 
children. This legislation is important to my home state of Ohio and 
would impact many families in Ohio and nationwide who are afflicted 
with urologic diseases.
  Ohio is a leader in urologic research. Researchers at the Children's 
Hospital of Cincinnati, the Cleveland Clinic, Case Western Reserve, and 
Ohio State University have made great strides toward achieving 
treatments. The fact is that urologic conditions affect millions of 
children and adults. Urology is a physiological system distinct from 
other body systems. Urologic conditions include incontinence, 
infertility, and impotence--all of which are extremely common, yet 
serious and debilitating. As many as 10 million children--more than 
30,000 in Ohio--are affected by urinary tract problems, and some forms 
of these problems can be deadly. At least half of all diabetics have 
bladder dysfunctions, which can include urinary retention, changes in 
bladder compliance, and incontinence. Interstitial Cystitis (IC), a 
painful bladder syndrome, affects 200,000 people, mostly women. There 
are no known causes or cures, and few minimally effective treatments. 
Additionally, there are 7 million urinary tract infections in the 
United States each year.
  Incontinence costs the healthcare system $25 billion each year and is 
a leading reason people are forced to enter nursing homes, impacting 
Medicare and Medicaid costs. Urinary tract infection treatment costs 
total more than $1 billion each year. Many urologic diseases, 
incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and cancer, increase in aging 
populations. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men, 
and African-American men are at a greater risk for the disease. 
Medicare beneficiaries suffer from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), 
which results in bladder dysfunction and urinary frequency. Fifty 
percent of men at age 60 have BPH. Treatment and surgery cost $2 
billion per year.
  Research for urologic disorders has failed to keep pace. Further 
delay translates into increased costs--in dollars, in needless 
suffering, and in the loss of human dignity. Incontinence costs the 
healthcare system $23 billion each year, yet only 90 cents per patient 
is spent on research--little more than the cost of a single adult 
undergarment. In 2002, only $5 million of the $88 million in new 
initiatives from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and 
Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) was designated to urologic diseases and 
conditions. Of that $5 million, no new initiatives were announced for 
women's urologic health problems. In 2001, we spent less than five 
cents per child on research into pediatric urologic problems. The 
medications currently used are very expensive and have unknown, long-
term side effects.
  The TRU Act establishes a Division of Urology at the NIDDK--the home 
of the urology basic science program--and expands existing research 
mechanisms, like the successful George O'Brien Urology Research 
Centers. This will give NIH new opportunities for investment in efforts 
to combat and vanquish these diseases.
  This legislation is necessary to elevate leadership in urology 
research at the NIDDK. When the Institute was created in its current 
form nearly 20 years ago, Congress specifically provided for three 
separate Division Directors. Regrettably, the current statute fails to 
provide the NIDDK with the flexibility to create additional Division 
Directors when necessary to better respond to current scientific 
opportunities. This prescriptive statutory language is unique to the 
NIDDK. For example, the National Cancer Institute and the National 
Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute do not have any statutory language 
regarding Division Directors.
  Mr. President, the basic science breakthroughs of the last decade are 
literally passing urology by. A greater focus on urological diseases is 
needed at the NIDDK and will be best accomplished with senior 
leadership with expertise in urology as provided in the TRU Act. This 
legislation is supported by the Coalition for Urologic Research & 
Education (CURE)--a group representing tens of thousands of patients, 
researchers and healthcare providers. I urge my colleagues to join me 
as co-sponsors of the TRU Act.
  Mr. President, 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. 258

       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 ``Training and Research in 
     Urology Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. RESEARCH, TRAINING, AND HEALTH INFORMATION 
                   DISSEMINATION WITH RESPECT TO UROLOGIC 
                   DISEASES.

       (a) Division Director of Urology.--Section 428 of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-2) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``and a Division 
     Director for Kidney, Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases'' and 
     inserting ``a Division Director for Urologic Diseases, and a 
     Division Director for Kidney and Hematologic Diseases'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``and the Division Director for Kidney, 
     Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases'' and inserting ``the 
     Division Director for Urologic Diseases, and the Division 
     Director for Kidney and Hematologic Diseases''; and
       (B) by striking ``(1) carry out programs'' and all that 
     follows through the end and inserting the following:
       ``(1) carry out programs of support for research and 
     training (other than training for which National Research 
     Service Awards may be made under section 487) in the 
     diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of diabetes mellitus and 
     endocrine and metabolic diseases, digestive diseases and 
     nutritional disorders, and kidney, urologic, and hematologic 
     diseases, including support for training in medical schools, 
     graduate clinical training (with particular attention to 
     programs geared to the needs of urology residents and 
     fellows), graduate training in epidemiology, epidemiology 
     studies, clinical trials, and interdisciplinary research 
     programs;
       ``(2) establish programs of evaluation, planning, and 
     dissemination of knowledge related to such research and 
     training;
       ``(3) in cooperation with the urologic scientific and 
     patient community, develop and submit to the Congress not 
     later than January 1, 2006, a national urologic research plan 
     that identifies research needs in the various areas of 
     urologic diseases, including pediatrics, interstitial 
     cystitis, incontinence, stone disease, urinary tract 
     infections, and benign prostatic diseases; and
       ``(4) in cooperation with the urologic scientific and 
     patient community, review the national urologic research plan 
     every 3 years beginning in 2009 and submit to the Congress 
     any revisions or additional recommendations.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end, the following:
       ``(c) There are authorized to be appropriated $500,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007 to carry out paragraphs 
     (3) and (4) of subsection (b), and such sums as may be 
     necessary thereafter.''.
       (b) Urologic Diseases Data System and Information 
     Clearinghouse.--Section 427 of the Public Health Service Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 285c-1) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c), by striking ``and Urologic'' and 
     ``and urologic'' each place either such term appears; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) The Director of the Institute shall--
       ``(1) establish the National Urologic Diseases Data System 
     for the collection, storage, analysis, retrieval, and 
     dissemination of data derived from patient populations with 
     urologic diseases, including, where possible, data involving 
     general populations for the purpose of detection of 
     individuals with a risk of developing urologic diseases; and
       ``(2) establish the National Urologic Diseases Information 
     Clearinghouse to facilitate and enhance knowledge and 
     understanding of urologic diseases on the part of health 
     professionals, patients, and the public through the effective 
     dissemination of information.''.
       (c) Strengthening the Urology Interagency Coordinating 
     Committee.--Section 429 of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 285c-3) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``and a Kidney, 
     Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases Coordinating Committee'' 
     and inserting ``a Urologic Diseases Interagency Coordinating 
     Committee, and a Kidney and Hematologic Diseases Interagency 
     Coordinating Committee'';
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``the Chief Medical 
     Director of the Veterans' Administration,'' and inserting 
     ``the Under Secretary for Health of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:

[[Page 1339]]

       ``(d) The urology interagency coordinating committee may 
     encourage, conduct, or support intra- or interagency 
     activities in urology research, including joint training 
     programs, joint research projects, planning activities, and 
     clinical trials.
       ``(e) For the purpose of carrying out the activities of the 
     Urologic Diseases Interagency Coordinating Committee, there 
     are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 2006 through 2010, and such sums as may be 
     necessary thereafter.''.
       (d) National Urologic Diseases Advisory Board.--Section 430 
     of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-4) is 
     amended by striking ``and the National Kidney and Urologic 
     Diseases Advisory Board'' and inserting ``the National 
     Urologic Diseases Advisory Board, and the National Kidney 
     Diseases Advisory Board''.
       (e) Expansion of O'Brien Urologic Disease Research 
     Centers.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 431 of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-5(c)) is amended in 
     the matter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting ``There shall 
     be no fewer than 15 such centers focused exclusively on 
     research of various aspects of urologic diseases, including 
     pediatrics, interstitial cystitis, incontinence, stone 
     disease, urinary tract infections, and benign prostatic 
     diseases.'' before ``Each center developed''.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--Section 431 of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-5) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(f) There are authorized to be appropriated for the 
     urologic disease research centers described in subsection (c) 
     $22,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010, and 
     such sums as are necessary thereafter.''.
       (3) Technical amendment.--Subsection (c) of section 431 of 
     the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-5(c)) is 
     amended at the beginning of the unnumbered paragraph--
       (A) by striking ``shall develop and conduct'' and inserting 
     ``(2) shall develop and conduct''; and
       (B) by aligning the indentation of such paragraph with the 
     indentation of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4).
       (f) Subcommittee on Urologic Diseases.--Section 432 of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-6) is amended by 
     striking ``and a subcommittee on kidney, urologic, and 
     hematologic diseases'' and inserting ``a subcommittee on 
     urologic diseases, and a subcommittee on kidney and 
     hematologic diseases''.
       (g) Loan Repayment to Encourage Urologists and Other 
     Scientists to Enter Research Careers.--Subpart 3 of part C of 
     title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c et 
     seq.) is amended by inserting after section 434A the 
     following:


             ``LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM FOR UROLOGY RESEARCH

       ``Sec. 434B. (a) Establishment.--Subject to subsection (b), 
     the Secretary shall carry out a program of entering into 
     contracts with appropriately qualified health professionals 
     or other qualified scientists under which such health 
     professionals or scientists agree to conduct research in the 
     field of urology, as employees of the National Institutes of 
     Health or of an academic department, division, or section of 
     urology, in consideration of the Federal Government agreeing 
     to repay, for each year of such research, not more than 
     $35,000 of the principal and interest of the educational 
     loans of such health professionals or scientists.
       ``(b) Limitation.--The Secretary may not enter into an 
     agreement with a health professional or scientist pursuant to 
     subsection (a) unless the professional or scientist--
       ``(1) has a substantial amount of educational loans 
     relative to income; and
       ``(2) agrees to serve as an employee of the National 
     Institutes of Health or of an academic department, division, 
     or section of urology for purposes of the research 
     requirement of subsection (a) for a period of not less than 3 
     years.
       ``(c) Applicability of Certain Provisions.--Except as 
     inconsistent with this section, the provisions of subpart 3 
     of part D of title III apply to the program established under 
     subsection (a) in the same manner and to the same extent as 
     such provisions apply to the National Health Service Corps 
     Loan Repayment Program established under such subpart.''.
       (h) Authorization of Appropriations for Urology Research.--
     Subpart 3 of part C of title IV of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 285c et seq.) (as amended by subsection (g)) 
     is further amended by inserting after section 434B the 
     following:


        ``AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR UROLOGY RESEARCH.

       ``Sec. 434C. There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Director of NIH for the purpose of carrying out intra- and 
     interagency activities in urology research (including 
     training programs, joint research projects, and joint 
     clinical trials) $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 
     through 2010, and such sums as may be necessary thereafter. 
     Amounts authorized to be appropriated under this section 
     shall be in addition to amounts otherwise available for such 
     purpose.''.

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to join my colleague, 
Senator Mike DeWine, in introducing the Training and Research in 
Urology Act--the ``TRU'' Act. Each day, millions of American men, women 
and children suffer with urologic conditions--children suffering from 
urological abnormalities, women living with painful urologic illnesses, 
the elderly for whom urologic conditions can present a wide variety of 
very serious health problems. The silent struggle of patients with 
urologic diseases has gone on too long. The legislation we introduce 
today seeks to ease the burden of millions of Americans suffering from 
urologic illnesses.
  The amazing breakthroughs of the last decade in basic science have 
resulted in new treatments and even cures for some urologic conditions. 
Unfortunately, these exciting advancements often fail to reach many who 
suffer from urologic diseases. It is time to change the way we think 
and deal with urologic disease.
  The TRU Act will create a new urology-specific division at the 
National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases, NIDDK. 
Senior urology leadership at NIDDK will assure that urology receives 
adequate attention and will allow science to drive the research agenda. 
Federal legislation is necessary because more than 20 years ago 
Congress established the current three divisions within NIDDK. Unlike 
the other institutes at NIH, the director does not have the authority 
to establish new divisions when warranted. Urologic discoveries have 
advanced the science over the past two decades and I believe a urology 
division at NIDDK will assure continued progress in urology research.
  I was surprised to learn that the most frequently occurring birth 
defects are related to urologic conditions. In fact, Spina Bifida alone 
affects approximately 4,000 newborns in the United States each year. 
The Spina Bifida Association of America informed me that those living 
``with Spina Bifida often refer to the complications associated with 
neurogenic bowel and bladder as the most difficult for them both 
physically and socially. ``
  The TRU Act would also charge NIDDK with creating a national urologic 
research plan and create an additional 10 centers for the study of 
urologic diseases, as well as recruit and retain talented investigators 
through a loan repayment program.
  In Connecticut, as in many states, there is important urologic 
research being conducted currently. Researchers at Yale University have 
made great strides toward achieving treatments of benefit to all 
Americans. For example, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, BPH, commonly 
referred as an enlarged prostate, impacts more than 125,000 men in 
Connecticut and more than 50 percent of men 60 years of age and older. 
BPH is the second most common kidney or urologic condition requiring 
hospitalization and the fifth leading reason for physician visits. Yale 
University's Dr. Harris Foster, Jr. is studying the use of phytotherapy 
to relieve lower urinary tract symptoms, particularly BPH. The research 
supported by the TRU Act will support this and other important urologic 
research initiatives nationwide.
  The TRU Act is supported by the Spina Bifida Association of America 
and the Urology Section of the American Academy of Pediatrics, as well 
as the Coalition for Urologic Research and Education, CURE, a group 
representing hundreds of thousands of patients, researchers and 
healthcare providers, including the Men's Health Network and the 
Society for Women's Health Research.
  The TRU Act will lead urology research and training into the 21st 
century, and more important, it will lead to better the lives of 
millions of patients, young and old, struggling to live with urologic 
diseases. Therefore, I join my colleague in supporting this worthy 
measure and urge all of my colleagues to support this important 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INHOFE:
  S. 260. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide 
technical and financial assistance to private landowners to restore, 
enhance, and manage private land to improve

[[Page 1340]]

fish and wildlife habitats through the Partners for Fish and Wildlife 
Program; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Partners for 
Fish and Wildlife Act.
  On August 26, 2004, President Bush signed Executive Order 13352 
promoting a new approach to conservation within the Federal 
government's conservation and environmental departments. This Executive 
Order was offered to ensure that Federal agencies pursue cooperative 
conservation actions designed to involve private landowners rather than 
simply making mandates which private landowners must fulfill.
  An example of this new cooperative conservation is the Partners for 
Fish and Wildlife Program. Since 1987, the Partners Program has been a 
successful voluntary partnership program that helps private landowners 
restore fish and wildlife habitat on their own lands. Through 33,103 
agreements with private landowners, the Partners Program has 
accomplished the restoration of 677,000 acres of wetlands, 1,253,700 
acres of prairies and native grasslands, and 5,560 miles of riparian 
and in-stream habitat. Partners Program agreements are funded through 
contributions from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service along with cash 
and in-kind contributions from participating private landowners. Since 
1990, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has provided $3,511,121 to 
restore habitat in Oklahoma through the Partners Program, to which 
private landowners have contributed $12,638,272.
  In Oklahoma, 97 percent of land is held in private ownership. Since 
1990, a total of 124,285 acres in Oklahoma has been restored through 
700 individual Partners Program voluntary agreements with private 
landowners. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service District Office in Tulsa 
currently reports that at least another 100 private landowners are 
waiting to enter into Partner's projects as soon as funds become 
available.
  As chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, a 
new approach to conservation is especially important to me. All 
conservation programs should create positive incentives to protect 
species and, above all, should hold sacred the rights of private 
landowners. A positive step toward those aims is authorization of the 
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program which has already proven to be 
an effective habitat conservation program that leverages federal funds 
and utilizes voluntary private landowner participation. To date, the 
Partners Program has received little attention. My bill will build on 
this successful program to provide additional funding and added 
stability.
  I am pleased to author legislation to authorize a program with a 
proven record in positive and actual conservation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. Akaka):
  S. 262. A bill to authorize appropriations to the Secretary of 
Interior for the restoration of the Angel Island Immigration Station in 
the State of California; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Angel 
Island Immigration Station Restoration and Preservation Act, with 
Senator Boxer as an original cosponsor.
  This legislation authorizes the use of up to $15 million in Federal 
funds for ongoing efforts to restore and preserve the Angel Island 
Immigration Station located on Angel Island in San Francisco Bay.
  I understand that Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey is introducing similar 
legislation in the House. In the 108th Congress, Congresswoman 
Woolsey's Angel Island bill passed the House.
  The Angel Island Immigration Station is an important piece of 
American history, especially to our Nation's Asian American and 
immigrant communities.
  From the mid 19th to early 20th century, millions of people came to 
America in pursuit of the American dream. Most people are familiar with 
Ellis Island and the stories of immigrants coming to America and seeing 
the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor, but often forgotten are the 
experiences of those who made it to America through the West Coast by 
way of Angel Island. Just like those who came through Ellis Island, 
there are many stories of triumph and tribulation associated with Angel 
Island.
  However, for the Chinese and those from other Asian countries who 
came through Angel Island Immigration Station the story goes a bit 
further.
  The economic downturn in the 1870s brought political pressures to 
deal with the increasing population of Chinese who risked everything to 
travel to ``Gold Mountain'' in search of a better life. Amongst the 
harshest of measures taken was the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act 
of 1882, the only legislation enacted by Congress to ban a specific 
ethnic population from entry into the United States.
  To enforce this new law and subsequent legislation which excluded 
most Asian immigrants to this country, the Angel Island Immigration 
Station was established in 1910.
  After a difficult journey across the Pacific Ocean, many new arrivals 
were brought to the Station where they faced separation from their 
family, embarrassing medical examinations, grueling interrogations and 
long detainments that lasted months, even years, in living deplorable 
conditions.
  Testaments to these experiences can be found today on the wooden 
walls of the barracks. Many of the detainees told their stories through 
poems that they carved on the barrack walls. Using allegories and 
historical references, they described their aspirations for coming to 
America as well as expressed their anger and sadness at the treatment 
they received. However, this experience did not break the spirit of 
these new courageous immigrants. They endured and established new roots 
and made immeasurable contributions to this nation.
  The Station was closed in 1940 and three years later Congress 
repealed the Chinese Exclusion Act. For the next 20 years the Station 
remained mostly unused except for a short term during World War II, 
when it was used as a prisoner of war camp.
  In 1963, Angel Island became a State park and the California 
Department of Parks and Recreation assumed stewardship of the 
Immigration Station.
  In the late 1990's, the Station was a declared a National Historic 
Landmark and named on ``America's 11 Most Endangered Historic Places.'' 
In 1998, Congress approved $300,000 to conduct a study to determine the 
feasibility and desirability of preserving sites within the Golden Gate 
National Recreation Area (GGNRA) which includes the Immigration 
Station. As a result, a historic three-party agreement was created 
between the National Park Service, California Department of Parks and 
the Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation to conduct this study. 
In 2000, Save America's Treasures named the Angel Island Immigration 
Station one of its Official Projects and provided $500,000 for the 
preservation of poems carved into the walls.
  The Station is supported by the people of California as well as 
numerous private interests. The voters of California voted in 2000 to 
set aside $15 million for restoration of the Station through 
Proposition 12 and in addition approximately $1.1 million in private 
funds has been raised so far. Most recently, in December 2004, the 
California Cultural and Historical Endowment Board voted to reserve $3 
million pending further staff findings for the Immigration Station.
  The legislation limits Federal funding to 50 percent the total funds 
from all sources spent to restore the Angel Island Immigration Station. 
The remaining money will be provided through State bond funding and 
raised through private means, making this a true public private 
partnership.
  Today, approximately 200,000 visits are made each year to Angel 
Island by ferry from San Francisco, Tiburon and Alameda. In addition, 
60,000 visits are made to the Immigration Station, about half of which 
are students on guided tours.
  The resources secured so far have set in motion designing, planning 
and initial restoration efforts of the Immigration Station but much 
more is needed,

[[Page 1341]]

particularly to save the Immigration Station Hospital building, which 
is deteriorating.
  The bill I am introducing today will authorize $15 million in Federal 
funding to complete the restoration of the Angel Island Immigration 
Station so the stories of these early Americans who courageously 
endured the experience at the Angel Island Immigration Station will be 
preserved for future generations.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I ask unanimous consent 
that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 262

       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 ``Angel Island Immigration 
     Station Restoration and Preservation Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Angel Island Immigration Station, also known as the 
     Ellis Island of the West, is a National Historic Landmark.
       (2) Between 1910 and 1940, the Angel Island Immigration 
     Station processed more than 1,000,000 immigrants and 
     emigrants from around the world.
       (3) The Angel Island Immigration Station contributes 
     greatly to our understanding of our Nation's rich and complex 
     immigration history.
       (4) The Angel Island Immigration Station was built to 
     enforce the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and subsequent 
     immigration laws, which unfairly and severely restricted 
     Asian immigration.
       (5) During their detention at the Angel Island Immigration 
     Station, Chinese detainees carved poems into the walls of the 
     detention barracks. More than 140 poems remain today, 
     representing the unique voices of immigrants awaiting entry 
     to this country.
       (6) More than 50,000 people, including 30,000 
     schoolchildren, visit the Angel Island Immigration Station 
     annually to learn more about the experience of immigrants who 
     have traveled to our shores.
       (7) The restoration of the Angel Island Immigration Station 
     and the preservation of the writings and drawings at the 
     Angel Island Immigration Station will ensure that future 
     generations also have the benefit of experiencing and 
     appreciating this great symbol of the perseverance of the 
     immigrant spirit, and of the diversity of this great Nation.

     SEC. 3. RESTORATION.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior 
     $15,000,000 for restoring the Angel Island Immigration 
     Station in the San Francisco Bay, in coordination with the 
     Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation and the 
     California Department of Parks and Recreation.
       (b) Federal Funding.--Federal funding under this Act shall 
     not exceed 50 percent of the total funds from all sources 
     spent to restore the Angel Island Immigration Station.
       (c) Priority.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     funds appropriated pursuant to this Act shall be used for the 
     restoration of the Immigration Station Hospital on Angel 
     Island.
       (2) Any remaining funds in excess of the amount required to 
     carry out paragraph (1) shall be used solely for the 
     restoration of the Angel Island Immigration Station.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Inouye):
  S. 263. A bill to provide for the protection of paleontological 
resources on Federal lands, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Paleontological Resources Preservation Act to protect and preserve the 
Nation's important fossil record for the benefit of our citizens. I am 
pleased to have Senators Baucus, Feinstein, Durbin, Roberts, and Inouye 
join me as original cosponsors on this significant legislation.
  This bill was reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources, and approved by unanimous consent during the 
108th Congress. A similar bill was introduced in the other body by 
Representative James R. McGovern, with 15 cosponsors, but was not 
reported by the Resources Committee. I hope we can pass this again 
quickly in the Senate and move the bill in the House of 
Representatives.
  You may remember that in 1999, Congress requested that the Secretary 
of the Interior review and report on the Federal policy concerning 
paleontological resources on Federal lands. In its request, Congress 
noted that no unified Federal policy existed regarding the--treatment 
of fossils by Federal land management agencies, and emphasized 
Congress's concerns that a lack of appropriate standards would lead to 
the deterioration or loss of fossils, which are valuable scientific 
resources. Unfortunately, that situation remains the case today.
  In the past year alone, there have been compelling finds of fossils 
that are helping us unlock the mysteries of the past from the earth, 
whether violent tectonic cataclysms or depletion of oxygen in the 
oceans and consequent drastic changes in species. The National Parks 
Conservation Association NPCA, a bipartisan non-profit organization 
dedicated to protecting and enhancing National Parks, recently called 
for ``stronger laws, better enforcement, and better education programs 
. . . to more fully protect these valuable [fossil] relics.'' In its 
Fall 2004 issue of National Parks, the article described the discovery 
at Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota, in July 2003, of fossilized 
remains of a 5-foot tall hornless rhinoceros, a collie-sized horse, and 
a foot-tall, deer-like mammal.
  National Parks are the home of many extraordinary fossil discoveries 
already, such as the graveyards of 20-million-year old camels and 
rhinos at Agate Fossil Beds National Monument in Nebraska, the only 
pygmy island-dwelling mammoth at Channel Islands National Park in 
California; and tropical dinosaurs in what are now the arid lands of 
the Painted Desert of southern Arizona.
  Besides the National Park Service, other Federal land management 
agencies have a number of regulations and directives on paleontological 
resources, but they are not consistent and there is no clear statutory 
language providing direction in protecting and curating fossils. I 
would like to commend to my colleagues two reports recently published 
by the Congressional Research Service, CRS, which we know as an 
impartial, non-partisan legislative research service that provides 
analysis for Congress. The CRS American Law Division published two 
reports entitled ``Federal Management and Protection of Fossil 
Resources on Federal Lands'' and, ``Paleontological Resources 
Protection Act: Proposal for the Management and Protection of Fossil 
Resources Located on Federal Lands.''
  These two reports analyze the status and activities of Federal 
agencies with paleontological responsibilities, the statutory 
authorities for fossils, the case law supporting them, and the bills 
recently introduced on fossils such as S. 546 in the 108th Congress. 
The reports point out that several Federal agencies have management 
authority for the protection of fossil resources on the lands under 
their jurisdiction--the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land 
Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Fish and Wildlife Service, and 
National Park Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's U.S. 
Forest Service. The report also points out that the U.S. Geological 
Survey, Department of Defense, and Smithsonian Institution have some 
fossil responsibilities. The reports further find that agency 
enforcement and prosecution policies differ greatly and there is only 
limited and scattered authority for Federal management and protection 
of fossil resources on Federal lands.
  The report concludes that the scattered authorities result in case 
law on fossil protection that is not well developed and not necessarily 
consistent. The cases do not provide clear case precedent and are not 
necessarily applicable to broader protection, regulation, management, 
and marketing issues.
  Both reports conclude that there is an absence of uniform regulations 
for paleontological resources on Federal lands--as shown by an absence 
of precise uniform definitions of key terms--and that there is no 
comprehensive statute or management policy for the protection and 
management of fossils on Federal lands.
  The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act embodies the 
principles

[[Page 1342]]

recommended by an interagency group in a 2000 report to Congress 
entitled ``Assessment of Fossil Management on Federal and Indian 
Lands.'' The bill provides the paleontological equivalent of 
protections found in the Archaeological Resources Preservation Act. The 
bill finds that fossil resources on Federal lands are an irreplaceable 
part of the heritage of the United States and affirms that reasonable 
access to fossil resources should be provided for scientific, 
educational, and recreational purposes. The bill acknowledges the value 
of amateur collecting and provides an exception for casual collecting 
of invertebrate fossils, but protects vertebrate fossils found on 
Federal lands under a system of permits. The fossil bill does not 
restrict access of the interested public to fossils on public lands but 
rather will help create opportunities for involvement. For example, 
there are many amateur paleontologists volunteering to assist in the 
excavation and curation of fossils on national park lands already.
  Finally, I would like to emphasize that this bill in no way affects 
archaeological or cultural resources under the Archaeological Resources 
Protection Act of 1979 or the Native American Graves Protection and 
Rehabilitation Act. They are exempted because they are very different 
types of resources This bill covers only paleontological remains--
fossils on Federal lands.
  As we look toward the future, public access to fossil resources will 
take on a new meaning, as digital images of fossils become available 
worldwide. Discoveries in paleontology are made more frequently than we 
realize. They shape how we learn about the world around us. In January 
of this year, Science Express, the on-line version of the journal 
Science, reported two studies using paleontological data to understand 
the causes of the ``Great Dying,'' or mass extinctions that occurred 
about 250 million years ago in the Permian-Triassic period. The 
Paleontological Resources Preservation Act would create a legacy for 
the production of scientific knowledge for future generations.
  The protections offered in this act are not new. Federal land 
management agencies already have individual regulations prohibiting 
theft of government property. However, the reality is that U.S. 
attorneys are reluctant to prosecute cases involving fossil theft 
because they are difficult. The National Park Service reported 721 
incidents of vandalism; and visitors annually take up to 12 tons of 
petrified wood from Petrified Forest National Park, a fact that has 
lead the NPCA to place the Petrified National Forest on its ``Ten Most 
Endangered National Parks'' lists in 2000 and 2001.
  Congress has not provided a clear statute stating the value of 
paleontological resources to our Nation, as has been provided for 
archaeological resources. Fossils are too valuable to be left within 
the general theft provisions that are difficult to prosecute, and they 
are too valuable to the education of our children not to ensure public 
access. We need to work together to make sure that we fulfill our 
responsibility as stewards of public lands, and as protectors of our 
Nation's natural resources.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 263

       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 ``Paleontological Resources 
     Preservation Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act:
       (1) Casual collecting.--The term ``casual collecting'' 
     means the collecting of a reasonable amount of common 
     invertebrate and plant paleontological resources for non-
     commercial personal use, either by surface collection or the 
     use of non-powered hand tools resulting in only negligible 
     disturbance to the Earth's surface and other resources. As 
     used in this paragraph, the terms ``reasonable amount'', 
     ``common invertebrate and plant paleontological resources'' 
     and ``negligible disturbance'' shall be determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior with respect to lands controlled or 
     administered by the Secretary of the Interior or the 
     Secretary of Agriculture with respect to National Forest 
     System Lands controlled or administered by the Secretary of 
     Agriculture.
       (3) Federal lands.--The term ``Federal lands'' means--
       (A) lands controlled or administered by the Secretary of 
     the Interior, except Indian lands; or
       (B) National Forest System lands controlled or administered 
     by the Secretary of Agriculture.
       (4) Indian lands.--The term ``Indian Land'' means lands of 
     Indian tribes, or Indian individuals, which are either held 
     in trust by the United States or subject to a restriction 
     against alienation imposed by the United States.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means the fifty States, the 
     District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and 
     any other territory or possession of the United States.
       (6) Paleontological resource.--The term ``paleontological 
     resource'' means any fossilized remains, traces, or imprints 
     of organisms, preserved in or on the earth's crust, that are 
     of paleontological interest and that provide information 
     about the history of life on earth, except that the term does 
     not include--
       (A) any materials associated with an archaeological 
     resource (as defined in section 3(1) of the Archaeological 
     Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. 470bb(1)); or
       (B) any cultural item (as defined in section 2 of the 
     Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 
     U.S.C. 3001)).

     SEC. 3. MANAGEMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall manage and protect 
     paleontological resources on Federal lands using scientific 
     principles and expertise. The Secretary shall develop 
     appropriate plans for inventory, monitoring, and the 
     scientific and educational use of paleontological resources, 
     in accordance with applicable agency laws, regulations, and 
     policies. These plans shall emphasize interagency 
     coordination and collaborative efforts where possible with 
     non-Federal partners, the scientific community, and the 
     general public.
       (b) Coordination.--To the extent possible, the Secretary of 
     the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     coordinate in the implementation of this Act.

     SEC. 4. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION PROGRAM.

       The Secretary shall establish a program to increase public 
     awareness about the significance of paleontological 
     resources.

     SEC. 5. COLLECTION OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

       (a) Permit Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in this Act, a 
     paleontological resource may not be collected from Federal 
     lands without a permit issued under this Act by the 
     Secretary.
       (2) Casual collecting exception.--The Secretary may allow 
     casual collecting without a permit on Federal lands 
     controlled or administered by the Bureau of Land Management, 
     the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Forest Service, where such 
     collection is consistent with the laws governing the 
     management of those Federal lands and this Act.
       (3) Previous permit exception.--Nothing in this section 
     shall affect a valid permit issued prior to the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Criteria for Issuance of a Permit.--The Secretary may 
     issue a permit for the collection of a paleontological 
     resource pursuant to an application if the Secretary 
     determines that--
       (1) the applicant is qualified to carry out the permitted 
     activity;
       (2) the permitted activity is undertaken for the purpose of 
     furthering paleontological knowledge or for public education;
       (3) the permitted activity is consistent with any 
     management plan applicable to the Federal lands concerned; 
     and
       (4) the proposed methods of collecting will not threaten 
     significant natural or cultural resources.
       (c) Permit Specifications.--A permit for the collection of 
     a paleontological resource issued under this section shall 
     contain such terms and conditions as the Secretary deems 
     necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act. Every permit 
     shall include requirements that--
       (1) the paleontological resource that is collected from 
     Federal lands under the permit will remain the property of 
     the United States;
       (2) the paleontological resource and copies of associated 
     records will be preserved for the public in an approved 
     repository, to be made available for scientific research and 
     public education; and
       (3) specific locality data will not be released by the 
     permittee or repository without the written permission of the 
     Secretary.
       (d) Modification, Suspension, and Revocation of Permits.--
       (1) The Secretary may modify, suspend, or revoke a permit 
     issued under this section--
       (A) for resource, safety, or other management 
     considerations; or

[[Page 1343]]

       (B) when there is a violation of term or condition of a 
     permit issued pursuant to this section.
       (2) The permit shall be revoked if any person working under 
     the authority of the permit is convicted under section 9 or 
     is assessed a civil penalty under section 10.
       (e) Area Closures.--In order to protect paleontological or 
     other resources and to provide for public safety, the 
     Secretary may restrict access to or close areas under the 
     Secretary's jurisdiction to the collection of paleontological 
     resources.

     SEC. 6. CURATION OF RESOURCES.

       Any paleontological resource, and any data and records 
     associated with the resource, collected under a permit, shall 
     be deposited in an approved repository. The Secretary may 
     enter into agreements with non-Federal repositories regarding 
     the curation of these resources, data, and records.

     SEC. 7. PROHIBITED ACTS; CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

       (a) In General.--A person may not--
       (1) excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface 
     or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or 
     deface any paleontological resources located on Federal lands 
     unless such activity is conducted in accordance with this 
     Act;
       (2) exchange, transport, export, receive, or offer to 
     exchange, transport, export, or receive any paleontological 
     resource if, in the exercise of due care, the person knew or 
     should have known such resource to have been excavated or 
     removed from Federal lands in violation of any provisions, 
     rule, regulation, law, ordinance, or permit in effect under 
     Federal law, including this Act; or
       (3) sell or purchase or offer to sell or purchase any 
     paleontological resource if, in the exercise of due care, the 
     person knew or should have known such resource to have been 
     excavated, removed, sold, purchased, exchanged, transported, 
     or received from Federal lands.
       (b) False Labeling Offenses.--A person may not make or 
     submit any false record, account, or label for, or any false 
     identification of, any paleontological resource excavated or 
     removed from Federal lands.
       (c) Penalties.--A person who knowingly violates or 
     counsels, procures, solicits, or employs another person to 
     violate subsection (a) or (b) shall, upon conviction, be 
     fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or 
     imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; but if the sum of 
     the commercial and paleontological value of the 
     paleontological resources involved and the cost of 
     restoration and repair of such resources does not exceed 
     $500, such person shall be fined in accordance with title 18, 
     United States Code, or imprisoned not more than one year, or 
     both.
       (d) General Exception.--Nothing in subsection (a) shall 
     apply to any person with respect to any paleontological 
     resource which was in the lawful possession of such person 
     prior to the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 8. CIVIL PENALTIES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Hearing.--A person who violates any prohibition 
     contained in an applicable regulation or permit issued under 
     this Act may be assessed a penalty by the Secretary after the 
     person is given notice and opportunity for a hearing with 
     respect to the violation. Each violation shall be considered 
     a separate offense for purposes of this section.
       (2) Amount of penalty.--The amount of such penalty assessed 
     under paragraph (1) shall be determined under regulations 
     promulgated pursuant to this Act, taking into account the 
     following factors:
       (A) The scientific or fair market value, whichever is 
     greater, of the paleontological resource involved, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (B) The cost of response, restoration, and repair of the 
     resource and the paleontological site involved.
       (C) Any other factors considered relevant by the Secretary 
     assessing the penalty.
       (3) Multiple offenses.--In the case of a second or 
     subsequent violation by the same person, the amount of a 
     penalty assessed under paragraph (2) may be doubled.
       (4) Limitation.--The amount of any penalty assessed under 
     this subsection for any one violation shall not exceed an 
     amount equal to double the cost of response, restoration, and 
     repair of resources and paleontological site damage plus 
     double the scientific or fair market value of resources 
     destroyed or not recovered.
       (b) Petition for Judicial Review; Collection of Unpaid 
     Assessments.--
       (1) Judicial review.--Any person against whom an order is 
     issued assessing a penalty under subsection (a) may file a 
     petition for judicial review of the order in the United 
     States District Court for the District of Columbia or in the 
     district in which the violation is alleged to have occurred 
     within the 30-day period beginning on the date the order 
     making the assessment was issued. Upon notice of such filing, 
     the Secretary shall promptly file such a certified copy of 
     the record on which the order was issued. The court shall 
     hear the action on the record made before the Secretary and 
     shall sustain the action if it is supported by substantial 
     evidence on the record considered as a whole.
       (2) Failure to pay.--If any person fails to pay a penalty 
     under this section within 30 days--
       (A) after the order making assessment has become final and 
     the person has not filed a petition for judicial review of 
     the order in accordance with paragraph (1); or
       (B) after a court in an action brought in paragraph (1) has 
     entered a final judgment upholding the assessment of the 
     penalty, the Secretary may request the Attorney General to 
     institute a civil action in a district court of the United 
     States for any district in which the person if found, 
     resides, or transacts business, to collect the penalty (plus 
     interest at currently prevailing rates from the date of the 
     final order or the date of the final judgment, as the case 
     may be). The district court shall have jurisdiction to hear 
     and decide any such action. In such action, the validity, 
     amount, and appropriateness of such penalty shall not be 
     subject to review. Any person who fails to pay on a timely 
     basis the amount of an assessment of a civil penalty as 
     described in the first sentence of this paragraph shall be 
     required to pay, in addition to such amount and interest, 
     attorneys fees and costs for collection proceedings.
       (c) Hearings.--Hearings held during proceedings instituted 
     under subsection (a) shall be conducted in accordance with 
     section 554 of title 5, United States Code.
       (d) Use of Recovered Amounts.--Penalties collected under 
     this section shall be available to the Secretary and without 
     further appropriation may be used only as follows:
       (1) To protect, restore, or repair the paleontological 
     resources and sites which were the subject of the action, or 
     to acquire sites with equivalent resources, and to protect, 
     monitor, and study the resources and sites. Any acquisition 
     shall be subject to any limitations contained in the organic 
     legislation for such Federal lands.
       (2) To provide educational materials to the public about 
     paleontological resources and sites.
       (3) To provide for the payment of rewards as provided in 
     section 11.

     SEC. 9. REWARDS AND FORFEITURE.

       (a) Rewards.--The Secretary may pay from penalties 
     collected under section 9 or 10--
       (1) consistent with amounts established in regulations by 
     the Secretary; or
       (2) if no such regulation exists, an amount equal to the 
     lesser of one-half of the penalty or $500, to any person who 
     furnishes information which leads to the finding of a civil 
     violation, or the conviction of criminal violation, with 
     respect to which the penalty was paid. If several persons 
     provided the information, the amount shall be divided among 
     the persons. No officer or employee of the United States or 
     of any State or local government who furnishes information or 
     renders service in the performance of his official duties 
     shall be eligible for payment under this subsection.
       (b) Forfeiture.--All paleontological resources with respect 
     to which a violation under section 9 or 10 occurred and which 
     are in the possession of any person, and all vehicles and 
     equipment of any person that were used in connection with the 
     violation, shall be subject to civil forfeiture, or upon 
     conviction, to criminal forfeiture. All provisions of law 
     relating to the seizure, forfeiture, and condemnation of 
     property for a violation of this Act, the disposition of such 
     property or the proceeds from the sale thereof, and remission 
     or mitigation of such forfeiture, as well as the procedural 
     provisions of chapter 46 of title 18, United States Code, 
     shall apply to the seizures and forfeitures incurred or 
     alleged to have incurred under the provisions of this Act.
       (c) Transfer of Seized Resources.--The Secretary may 
     transfer administration of seized paleontological resources 
     to Federal or non-Federal educational institutions to be used 
     for scientific or educational purposes.

     SEC. 10. CONFIDENTIALITY.

       Information concerning the nature and specific location of 
     a paleontological resource the collection of which requires a 
     permit under this Act or under any other provision of Federal 
     law shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of 
     title 5, United States Code, and any other law unless the 
     Secretary determines that disclosure would--
       (1) further the purposes of this Act;
       (2) not create risk of harm to or theft or destruction of 
     the resource or the site containing the resource; and
       (3) be in accordance with other applicable laws.

     SEC. 11. REGULATIONS.

       As soon as practical after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary shall issue such regulations as are 
     appropriate to carry out this Act, providing opportunities 
     for public notice and comment.

     SEC. 12. SAVINGS PROVISIONS.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed to--
       (1) invalidate, modify, or impose any additional 
     restrictions or permitting requirements on any activities 
     permitted at any time under the general mining laws, the 
     mineral or geothermal leasing laws, laws providing for 
     minerals materials disposal, or laws providing for the 
     management or regulation of the activities authorized by the 
     aforementioned laws including but not limited to the Federal 
     Land Policy Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701-1784), the Mining 
     in the

[[Page 1344]]

     Parks Act, the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 
     1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201-1358), and the Organic Administration 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 478, 482, 551);
       (2) invalidate, modify, or impose any additional 
     restrictions or permitting requirements on any activities 
     permitted at any time under existing laws and authorities 
     relating to reclamation and multiple uses of Federal lands;
       (3) apply to, or require a permit for, casual collecting of 
     a rock, mineral, or invertebrate or plant fossil that is not 
     protected under this Act;
       (4) affect any lands other than Federal lands or affect the 
     lawful recovery, collection, or sale of paleontological 
     resources from lands other than Federal lands;
       (5) alter or diminish the authority of a Federal agency 
     under any other law to provide protection for paleontological 
     resources on Federal lands in addition to the protection 
     provided under this Act; or
       (6) create any right, privilege, benefit, or entitlement 
     for any person who is not an officer or employee of the 
     United States acting in that capacity. No person who is not 
     an officer or employee of the United States acting in that 
     capacity shall have standing to file any civil action in a 
     court of the United States to enforce any provision or 
     amendment made by this Act.

     SEC. 13. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Inouye):
  S. 264. A bill to amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater 
Study and Facilities Act to authorize certain projects in the State of 
Hawaii; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today with the senior Senator from 
Hawaii to introduce legislation to authorize three important water 
reclamation projects in the State of Hawaii. This legislation, the 
Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005, is identical to legislation 
considered in the 108th Congress that passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent on May 19, 2004.
  Although one usually does not readily associate the State of Hawaii 
as a place with drought problems, Hawaii has been experiencing drought 
conditions since 1998. The Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005 builds 
upon the Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2000 P.L. 106-566 that 
authorized the Bureau of Reclamation to survey irrigation and water 
delivery systems in Hawaii and identify new opportunities for 
reclamation and reuse of water and wastewater for agriculture and non-
agricultural purposes. While the Act resulted in the development of the 
initial Hawaii Drought Plan in 2000, which was updated this past year 
to incorporate comments and recommendations made by the Bureau of 
Reclamation, more needs to be done.
  Although Hawaii is just beginning to recover from a multi-year 
drought, the National Weather Service has indicated that due to a mild 
El Nino effect in the Pacific Ocean, Hawaii may again experience 
another period of drought. It is imperative for Hawaii to improve its 
ways to reduce consumption of drinking water. The legislation that I am 
introducing today, the Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005, will help 
the State of Hawaii to be proactive by authorizing projects that will 
address the demand on our freshwater supply, especially on the islands 
of Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii.
  The legislation authorizes three projects. The first project, in 
Honolulu, will provide reliable potable water through resource 
diversification to meet existing and future demands, particularly in 
the Ewa area of Oahu where water demands are outpacing the availability 
of drinking water. The second project, in North Kona, will address the 
issue of effluent being discharged into a temporary disposal sump from 
the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant. The project would utilize 
subsurface wetlands to naturally clean the effluent and convey the 
recycled water to a number of users. The third project, in Lahaina, 
will reduce the use of potable water by extending the County of Maui's 
main recycled water pipeline.
  The Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005 will begin the next phase of 
ensuring that the State of Hawaii will continue to have a supply of 
fresh drinking water. It is vitally important for the State to begin 
working on these water reclamation projects and I urge my colleagues to 
support this legislation which is important to communities in Hawaii.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Roberts, Mr. 
        Jeffords, Mr. Talent, Mrs. Murray, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 265. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to add 
requirements regarding trauma care, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, each year, nearly 1 of every 10 Americans 
is injured and requires medical attention. Injuries are the fifth 
leading cause of death in the United States. Trauma kills more people 
between the ages of one and 44 than any other disease or illness.
  While injury prevention programs have greatly reduced death and 
disability, severe injuries will continue. Given the mass trauma events 
of September 11, 2001 and our Nation's renewed focus on enhancing 
disaster preparedness, it is critical that the Federal Government 
increase its commitment to strengthening programs governing trauma care 
system planning and development.
  The direct and indirect cost of injury is estimated to be about $224 
billion a year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention. The death rate from unintentional injury is more than 50 
percent higher in rural areas than in urban areas. Only one fourth of 
the U.S. population lives in an area served by a trauma care system. 
Studies of conventional trauma care show that as many as 35 percent of 
trauma patient deaths could have been prevented if optimal acute care 
had been available. It is essential that all Americans have access to a 
trauma system that provides needed care as quickly as possible.
  Since 1990, Congress has sought to improve care through the Trauma 
Care Systems Planning and Development Act. This Act provides grants for 
planning, implementing, and developing statewide trauma care systems. 
This critical program must be reauthorized. Therefore, I am introducing 
bipartisan legislation today, along with Senators Kennedy, Roberts, 
Jeffords, Talent, Clinton, and Murray to reauthorize this program.
  Despite our past investments, one half of the States in the country 
are still without a statewide trauma care system. Clearly we can do 
better. We must respond to the goals put forth by the Institute of 
Medicine in 1999--that Congress ``support a greater national commitment 
to, and support of, trauma care systems at the federal, state, and 
local levels.''
  The ``Trauma Care Systems Planning and Development Act of 2005'', 
reauthorizes this program with several improvements: first, it improves 
the collection and analysis of trauma patient data with the goal of 
improving the overall system of care for these patients; second, the 
bill reduces the amount of matching funds that states will have to 
provide to participate in the program so that we can extend quality 
trauma care systems across the nation; third, the legislation provides 
a self-evaluation mechanism to assist states in assessing and improving 
their trauma care systems; fourth, it authorizes the Institute of 
Medicine to study the state of trauma care and trauma research; and 
finally, it doubles the funding available for this program to allow 
additional states to participate.
  I appreciate the support of my co-sponsors. I look forward to working 
with them, and with Senator Enzi, the Chairman of the Senate Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, to see this bill passed this 
year.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 265

       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 ``Trauma Care Systems Planning 
     and Development Act of 2005''.

[[Page 1345]]



     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Federal Government and State governments have 
     established a history of cooperation in the development, 
     implementation, and monitoring of integrated, comprehensive 
     systems for the provision of emergency medical services.
       (2) Trauma is the leading cause of death of Americans 
     between the ages of 1 and 44 years and is the third leading 
     cause of death in the general population of the United 
     States.
       (3) In 1995, the total direct and indirect cost of 
     traumatic injury in the United States was estimated at 
     $260,000,000,000.
       (4) There are 40,000 fatalities and 5,000,000 nonfatal 
     injuries each year from motor vehicle-related trauma, 
     resulting in an aggregate annual cost of $230,000,000,000 in 
     medical expenses, insurance, lost wages, and property damage.
       (5) Barriers to the receipt of prompt and appropriate 
     emergency medical services exist in many areas of the United 
     States.
       (6) The number of deaths from trauma can be reduced by 
     improving the systems for the provision of emergency medical 
     services in the United States.
       (7) Trauma care systems are an important part of the 
     emergency preparedness system needed for homeland defense.

     SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Establishment.--Section 1201 of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``, 
     acting through the Administrator of the Health Resources and 
     Services Administration,'' after ``Secretary'';
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs 
     (4) and (5), respectively;
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) collect, compile, and disseminate information on the 
     achievements of, and problems experienced by, State and local 
     agencies and private entities in providing trauma care and 
     emergency medical services and, in so doing, give special 
     consideration to the unique needs of rural areas;'';
       (D) in paragraph (4), as redesignated by subparagraph (B)--
       (i) by inserting ``to enhance each State's capability to 
     develop, implement, and sustain the trauma care component of 
     each State's plan for the provision of emergency medical 
     services'' after ``assistance''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (E) in paragraph (5), as redesignated by subparagraph (B), 
     by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and''; 
     and
       (F) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) promote the collection and categorization of trauma 
     data in a consistent and standardized manner.'';
       (2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``, acting through the 
     Administrator of the Health Resources and Services 
     Administration,'' after ``Secretary''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (c).
       (b) Clearinghouse on Trauma Care and Emergency Medical 
     Services.--The Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et 
     seq.) is amended--
       (1) by striking section 1202; and
       (2) by redesignating section 1203 as section 1202.
       (c) Establishment of Programs for Improving Trauma Care in 
     Rural Areas.--Section 1202(a) of the Public Health Service 
     Act, as such section was redesignated by subsection (b), is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph 
     (A), by inserting ``, such as advanced trauma life support,'' 
     after ``model curricula'';
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (3) in paragraph (5), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) by increasing communication and coordination with 
     State trauma systems.''.
       (d) Requirement of Matching Funds for Fiscal Years 
     Subsequent to First Fiscal Year of Payments.--Section 1212 of 
     the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-12) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) for the third fiscal year of such payments to the 
     State, not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided 
     in such payments for such fiscal year;
       ``(C) for the fourth fiscal year of such payments to the 
     State, not less than $2 for each $1 of Federal funds provided 
     in such payments for such fiscal year; and
       ``(D) for the fifth fiscal year of such payments to the 
     State, not less than $2 for each $1 of Federal funds provided 
     in such payments for such fiscal year.''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by adding ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a 
     period; and
       (C) by striking paragraph (3).
       (e) Requirements With Respect To Carrying Out Purpose of 
     Allotments.--Section 1213 of the Public Health Service Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 300d-13) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (3), in the matter preceding subparagraph 
     (A), by inserting ``nationally recognized'' after 
     ``contains'';
       (B) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``nationally 
     recognized'' after ``contains'';
       (C) in paragraph (6), by striking ``specifies procedures 
     for the evaluation of designated'' and inserting ``utilizes a 
     program with procedures for the evaluation of'';
       (D) in paragraph (7)--
       (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting 
     ``in accordance with data collection requirements developed 
     in consultation with surgical, medical, and nursing specialty 
     groups, State and local emergency medical services directors, 
     and other trained professionals in trauma care'' after 
     ``collection of data'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and the number of 
     deaths from trauma'' after ``trauma patients''; and
       (iii) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ``and the outcomes 
     of such patients'' after ``for such transfer'';
       (E) by redesignating paragraphs (10) and (11) as paragraphs 
     (11) and (12), respectively; and
       (F) by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:
       ``(10) coordinates planning for trauma systems with State 
     disaster emergency planning and bioterrorism hospital 
     preparedness planning;'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``concerning such'' 
     and inserting ``that outline resources for optimal care of 
     the injured patient''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``1992'' and 
     inserting ``2005''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1991'' and inserting 
     ``2005''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``1992'' and 
     inserting ``2005''; and
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``1990, the Secretary 
     shall develop a model plan'' and inserting ``2005, the 
     Secretary shall update the model plan''.
       (f) Requirement of Submission to Secretary of Trauma Plan 
     and Certain Information.--Section 1214(a) of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-14(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``1991'' and inserting ``2005''; and
       (B) by inserting ``that includes changes and improvements 
     made and plans to address deficiencies identified'' after 
     ``medical services''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``1991'' and inserting 
     ``2005''.
       (g) Restrictions on Use of Payments.--Section 1215(a)(1) of 
     the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-15(a)(1)) is 
     amended by striking the period at the end and inserting a 
     semicolon.
       (h) Requirements of Reports by States.--The Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by striking 
     section 1216 and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 1216. [RESERVED].''.

       (i) Report by the Secretary.--Section 1222 of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-22) is amended by striking 
     ``1995'' and inserting ``2007''.
       (j) Funding.--Section 1232(a) of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-32(a)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of 
     carrying out parts A and B, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and such sums 
     as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 
     2009.''.
       (k) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1232(b)(2) of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-32(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``1204'' and inserting ``1202''.
       (l) Institute of Medicine Study.--Part E of title XII of 
     the Public Health Service Act (20 U.S.C. 300d-51 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking the part heading and inserting the 
     following:

                  ``Part E--Miscellaneous Programs'';

     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 1254. INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE STUDY.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall enter into a 
     contract with the Institute of Medicine of the National 
     Academy of Sciences, or another appropriate entity, to 
     conduct a study on the state of trauma care and trauma 
     research.
       ``(b) Content.--The study conducted under subsection (a) 
     shall--
       ``(1) examine and evaluate the state of trauma care and 
     trauma systems research (including the role of Federal 
     entities in trauma research) on the date of enactment of this 
     section, and identify trauma research priorities;
       ``(2) examine and evaluate the clinical effectiveness of 
     trauma care and the impact of trauma care on patient 
     outcomes, with special attention to high-risk groups, such as 
     children, the elderly, and individuals in rural areas;
       ``(3) examine and evaluate trauma systems development and 
     identify obstacles that prevent or hinder the effectiveness 
     of trauma systems and trauma systems development;
       ``(4) examine and evaluate alternative strategies for the 
     organization, financing,

[[Page 1346]]

     and delivery of trauma care within an overall systems 
     approach; and
       ``(5) examine and evaluate the role of trauma systems and 
     trauma centers in preparedness for mass casualties.
       ``(c) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress a report containing the 
     results of the study conducted under this section.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $750,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.''.
       (m) Residency Training Programs in Emergency Medicine.--
     Section 1251(c) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     300d-51(c)) is amended by striking ``1993 through 1995'' and 
     inserting ``2005 through 2009''.
       (n) State Grants for Projects Regarding Traumatic Brain 
     Injury.--Section 1252 of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 300d-52) is amended in the section heading by striking 
     ``DEMONSTRATION''.
       (o) Interagency Program for Trauma Research.--Section 1261 
     of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-61) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``conducting basic'' and 
     all that follows through the period at the end of the second 
     sentence and inserting ``basic and clinical research on 
     trauma (in this section referred to as the `Program'), 
     including the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and 
     rehabilitation of trauma-related injuries.'';
       (2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Plan for Program.--The Director shall establish and 
     implement a plan for carrying out the activities of the 
     Program, taking into consideration the recommendations 
     contained within the report of the NIH Trauma Research Task 
     Force. The plan shall be periodically reviewed, and revised 
     as appropriate.'';
       (3) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ``acute head injury'' 
     and inserting ``traumatic brain injury''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``head'' and inserting 
     ``traumatic'';
       (4) by striking subsection (g);
       (5) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections 
     (g) and (h), respectively; and
       (6) in subsection (h), as redesignated by paragraph (5), by 
     striking ``2001 through 2005'' and inserting ``2005 through 
     2009''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Durbin, Mr. 
        Corzine, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Johnson, 
        Mr. Reed, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Leahy):
  S. 266. A bill to stop taxpayer funded Government propaganda; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to put 
an end to the spate of propaganda we are seeing across our government. 
In my view, it is a practice that is inconsistent with democracy, and 
we have to put a stop to it.
  That is why Senator Kennedy and I have drafted the ``Stop Government 
Propaganda Act'' which we are introducing today, along with our 
cosponsors, Senators Durbin, Corzine, Clinton, Dorgan, Murray, Johnson, 
Jack Reed, Lieberman and Leahy.
  Our bill will shut down the Administration's propaganda mill once and 
for all.
  Propaganda had its place in Saddam's Iraq. Propaganda was a staple of 
the old Soviet Union. But covert government propaganda has no place in 
the United States Government.
  In the last few weeks, we have seen revelations that a number of 
conservative columnists are actually on the Bush Administration's 
payroll to push the President's agenda.
  Armstrong Williams was paid to improve the image of President Bush's 
education programs, and the columnists Maggie Gallagher and Mike 
McManus were paid to promote the President's ``marriage initiative.''
  Some have called it the ``pundit payola'' scandal. But this scandal 
goes well beyond these particular payments to journalists.
  In fact, these secret payments are only the latest in a series of 
covert propaganda activities conducted by this Administration.
  Last year, we discovered that the Administration was paying a public 
relations firm to creat fake television news stories. These fake news 
stories touting the new Medicare law made their way onto local news 
shows on forty television stations across the country.
  These fake news stories even featured a fake reporter--Karen Ryan 
``reporting from Washington.'' While Karen Ryan does exist, she's not a 
reporter. She is a public relations consultant based here in 
Washington.
  Worse, the viewers who watched these fake news stories thought they 
were hearing real news. But what they were watching was Government-
produced propaganda.
  The Government Accountability Office investigated the legality of 
these fake news stories and came back with a clear decision: it was 
illegal propaganda. The GAO also said that the Administration must 
officially report the misspent funds to Congress.
  But the Bush Administration simply ignored GAO's legal ruling. The 
Administration said that because of the separation of powers, the GAO 
can't tell them what to do.
  So, in other words, the Administration has said that they will ignore 
the current law on the books. That is why we are introducing new 
legislation today that will put real teeth in the anti-propaganda law.
  Our bill, the Stop Government Propaganda Act, does two major things:
  First, it makes the Anti-Propaganda law permanent.
  Right now, the anti-propaganda law is passed year to year as a 
``rider'' in our appropriations bills. Making the law permanent will 
show that we are serious about it and want it obeyed.
  Also, our bill has real consequences for violations by the 
Administration. The current law is enforced by GAO, and the 
Administration is obviously ignoring their rulings. That has to change.
  Our bill calls for the Justice Department to pursue these violations. 
But in cases where DOJ fails to act, our bill authorizes citizen 
lawsuits to enforce the law.
  And we also give added power to the GAO. Right now, the 
Administration ignores the GAO's legal decisions. But our bill will 
make it downright painful for the Administration to ignore the GAO.
  When the GAO finds that taxpayer funds are misspent for propaganda 
purposes, and the agency fails to follow the GAO's ordered actions, our 
bill would call for the head of that agency's salary to be withheld.
  Our bill establishes a point of order against any appropriations bill 
that fails to enforce the salary reduction.
  Last week, President Bush said he agrees that it is wrong to pay 
journalists and that the practice must stop. But at the same time, the 
Bush Administration continues to ignore GAO's rulings on their 
propaganda violations.
  And while the attention was on Armstrong Williams, the Administration 
has been ramping up propaganda efforts at the Social Security 
Administration. In fact, last week, the Democratic Policy Committee 
heard testimony from two Social Security employees who revealed how 
they are being forced to push the White House agenda on the public.
  Rather than concentrate on getting benefits out or servicing people 
on Social Security, the White House is using SSA employees to spread 
its false propaganda message of a ``crisis'' in Social Security.
  That is why we must act now to put a stop to all of these practices. 
I urge my colleagues to support our bill, the Stop Government 
Propaganda Act.
  As we seek to establish democracy in Iraq, let's first remove this 
taint from our own democracy.
  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. 266

       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 ``Stop Government Propaganda 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Since 1951, the following prohibition on the use of 
     appropriated funds for propaganda purposes has been enacted 
     annually: ``No part of any appropriation contained in this or 
     any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda 
     purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized 
     by Congress.''.

[[Page 1347]]

       (2) On May 19, 2004, the Government Accountability Office 
     (GAO) ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services 
     violated the publicity and propaganda prohibitions by 
     creating fake television new stories for distribution to 
     broadcast stations across the country.
       (3) On January 4, 2005, the GAO ruled that the Office of 
     National drug Control Policy violated the publicity and 
     propaganda prohibitions by distributing fake television news 
     stories to broadcast stations from 2002 to 2004.
       (4) In 2003, the Department of Education violated publicity 
     and propaganda prohibitions by using of taxpayer funds to 
     create fake television news stories promoting the ``No Child 
     Left Behind'' program violated the propaganda prohibition.
       (5) An analysis of individual journalists, paid for by the 
     Department of Education in 2003, which ranked reporters on 
     how positive their articles portrayed the Administration and 
     the Republican Party, constituted a gross violation of the 
     law prohibiting propaganda and the use of taxpayer funds for 
     partisan purposes.
       (6) The payment of taxpayer funds to journalist Armstrong 
     Williams in 2003 to promote Administration education policies 
     violated the ban on covert propaganda.
       (7) The payment of taxpayer funds to journalist Maggie 
     Gallagher in 2002 to promote Administration welfare and 
     family policies violated the ban on covert propaganda.
       (8) Payment for and construction of 8 little red 
     schoolhouse facades at the entranceways to the Department of 
     Education headquarters in Washington, DC to boost the image 
     of the ``No Child Left Behind'' program was an inappropriate 
     use of taxpayer dollars.
       (9) Messages inserted into Social Security Administration 
     materials in 2004 and 2005 intended to further grassroots 
     lobbying efforts in favor of President Bush's Social Security 
     privatization plan is an inappropriate use of taxpayer funds.
       (10) The Department of Health and Human Services ignored 
     the Government Accountability Office's legal decision of May 
     19, 2004, and failed to follow the GAO's directive to report 
     its Anti-Deficiency Act violation to Congress and the 
     President, as provided by section 1351 of title 31, United 
     States Code.
       (11) Despite numerous violations of the propaganda law, the 
     Department of Justice has not acted to enforce the law or 
     follow the requirements of the Anti-Deficiency Act.
       (12) In order to protect taxpayer funds, stronger measures 
     must be enacted into law to require actual enforcement of the 
     ban on the use of taxpayer funds for propaganda purposes.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITION.

       In this Act, the term ``publicity'' or ``propaganda'' 
     includes--
       (1) a news release or other publication that does not 
     clearly identify the Government agency directly or indirectly 
     (through a contractor) financially responsible for the 
     message;
       (2) any audio or visual presentation that does not 
     continuously and clearly identify the Government agency 
     directly or indirectly financially responsible for the 
     message;
       (3) an Internet message that does not continuously and 
     clearly identify the Government agency directly or indirectly 
     financially responsible for the message;
       (4) any attempt to manipulate the news media by payment to 
     any journalist, reporter, columnist, commentator, editor, or 
     news organization;
       (5) any message designed to aid a political party or 
     candidate;
       (6) any message with the purpose of self-aggrandizement or 
     puffery of the Administration, agency, Executive branch 
     programs or policies, or pending congressional legislation;
       (7) a message of a nature tending to emphasize the 
     importance of the agency or its activities;
       (8) a message that is so misleading or inaccurate that it 
     constitutes propaganda; and
       (9) the preparation, distribution, or use of any kit, 
     pamphlet, booklet, publication, radio, television, or video 
     presentation designed to support or defeat legislation 
     pending before Congress or any State legislature, except in 
     presentation to Congress or any State legislature itself.

     SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON PUBLICITY OR PROPAGANDA AND 
                   ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) In General.--The senior official of an Executive branch 
     agency who authorizes or directs funds appropriated to such 
     Executive branch agency for publicity or propaganda purposes 
     within the United States, unless authorized by law, is liable 
     to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not 
     less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the 
     amount of funds appropriated.
       (b) Responsibilities of the Attorney General.--The Attorney 
     General diligently shall investigate a violation of 
     subsection (a). If the Attorney General finds that a person 
     has violated or is violating subsection (a), the Attorney 
     General may bring a civil action under this section against 
     the person.
       (c) Actions by Private Persons.--
       (1) In general.--A person may bring a civil action for a 
     violation of subsection (a) for the person and for the United 
     States Government. The action shall be brought in the name of 
     the Government. The action may be dismissed only if the court 
     and the Attorney General give written consent to the 
     dismissal and their reasons for consenting.
       (2) Notice.--A copy of the complaint and written disclosure 
     of substantially all material evidence and information the 
     person possesses shall be served on the Government pursuant 
     to Rule 4(d)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The 
     complaint shall be filed in camera, shall remain under seal 
     for at least 60 days, and shall not be served on the 
     defendant until the court so orders. The Government may elect 
     to intervene and proceed with the action within 60 days after 
     it receives both the complaint and the material evidence and 
     information.
       (3) Delay of notice.--The Government may, for good cause 
     shown, move the court for extensions of the time during which 
     the complaint remains under seal under paragraph (2). Any 
     such motions may be supported by affidavits or other 
     submissions in camera. The defendant shall not be required to 
     respond to any complaint filed under this section until 20 
     days after the complaint is unsealed and served upon the 
     defendant pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil 
     Procedure.
       (4) Government action.--Before the expiration of the 60-day 
     period or any extensions obtained under paragraph (3), the 
     Government shall--
       (A) proceed with the action, in which case the action shall 
     be conducted by the Government; or
       (B) notify the court that it declines to take over the 
     action, in which case the person bringing the action shall 
     have the right to conduct the action.
       (5) Limited intervention.--When a person brings an action 
     under this subsection, no person other than the Government 
     may intervene or bring a related action based on the facts 
     underlying the pending action.
       (d) Rights of the Parties.--
       (1) Government action.--If the Government proceeds with the 
     action, it shall have the primary responsibility for 
     prosecuting the action, and shall not be bound by an act of 
     the person bringing the action. Such person shall have the 
     right to continue as a party to the action, subject to the 
     limitations set forth in paragraph (2).
       (2) Limitations.--
       (A) Dismissal.--The Government may dismiss the action 
     notwithstanding the objections of the person initiating the 
     action if the person has been notified by the Government of 
     the filing of the motion and the court has provided the 
     person with an opportunity for a hearing on the motion.
       (B) Settlement.--The Government may settle the action with 
     the defendant notwithstanding the objections of the person 
     initiating the action if the court determines, after a 
     hearing, that the proposed settlement is fair, adequate, and 
     reasonable under all the circumstances. Upon a showing of 
     good cause, such hearing may be held in camera.
       (C) Proceedings.--Upon a showing by the Government that 
     unrestricted participation during the course of the 
     litigation by the person initiating the action would 
     interfere with or unduly delay the Government's prosecution 
     of the case, or would be repetitious, irrelevant, or for 
     purposes of harassment, the court may, in its discretion, 
     impose limitations on the person's participation, such as--
       (i) limiting the number of witnesses the person may call;
       (ii) limiting the length of the testimony of such 
     witnesses;
       (iii) limiting the person's cross-examination of witnesses; 
     or
       (iv) otherwise limiting the participation by the person in 
     the litigation.
       (D) Limit participation.--Upon a showing by the defendant 
     that unrestricted participation during the course of the 
     litigation by the person initiating the action would be for 
     purposes of harassment or would cause the defendant undue 
     burden or unnecessary expense, the court may limit the 
     participation by the person in the litigation.
       (3) Action by person.--If the Government elects not to 
     proceed with the action, the person who initiated the action 
     shall have the right to conduct the action. If the Government 
     so requests, it shall be served with copies of all pleadings 
     filed in the action and shall be supplied with copies of all 
     deposition transcripts (at the Government's expense). When a 
     person proceeds with the action, the court, without limiting 
     the status and rights of the person initiating the action, 
     may nevertheless permit the Government to intervene at a 
     later date upon a showing of good cause.
       (4) Interference.--Whether or not the Government proceeds 
     with the action, upon a showing by the Government that 
     certain actions of discovery by the person initiating the 
     action would interfere with the Government's investigation or 
     prosecution of a criminal or civil matter arising out of the 
     same facts, the court may stay such discovery for a period of 
     not more than 60 days. Such a showing shall be conducted in 
     camera. The court may extend the 60-day period upon a further 
     showing in camera that the Government has pursued the 
     criminal or civil investigation or proceedings with 
     reasonable diligence and any proposed discovery

[[Page 1348]]

     in the civil action will interfere with the ongoing criminal 
     or civil investigation or proceedings.
       (5) Government action.--Notwithstanding subsection (b), the 
     Government may elect to pursue its claim through any 
     alternate remedy available to the Government, including any 
     administrative proceeding to determine a civil money penalty. 
     If any such alternate remedy is pursued in another 
     proceeding, the person initiating the action shall have the 
     same rights in such proceeding as such person would have had 
     if the action had continued under this section. Any finding 
     of fact or conclusion of law made in such other proceeding 
     that has become final shall be conclusive on all parties to 
     an action under this section. For purposes of the preceding 
     sentence, a finding or conclusion is final if it has been 
     finally determined on appeal to the appropriate court of the 
     United States, if all time for filing such an appeal with 
     respect to the finding or conclusion has expired, or if the 
     finding or conclusion is not subject to judicial review.
       (e) Award to Private Plaintiff.--
       (1) Government action.--If the Government proceeds with an 
     action brought by a person under subsection (c), such person 
     shall, subject to the second sentence of this paragraph, 
     receive at least 15 percent but not more than 25 percent of 
     the proceeds of the action or settlement of the claim, 
     depending upon the extent to which the person substantially 
     contributed to the prosecution of the action.
       (2) No government action.--If the Government does not 
     proceed with an action under this section, the person 
     bringing the action or settling the claim shall receive an 
     amount which the court decides is reasonable for collecting 
     the civil penalty and damages. The amount shall be not less 
     than 25 percent and not more than 30 percent of the proceeds 
     of the action or settlement and shall be paid out of such 
     proceeds. Such person shall also receive an amount for 
     reasonable expenses which the court finds to have been 
     necessarily incurred, plus reasonable attorneys' fees and 
     costs. All such expenses, fees, and costs shall be awarded 
     against the defendant.
       (3) Frivolous claim.--If the Government does not proceed 
     with the action and the person bringing the action conducts 
     the action, the court may award to the defendant its 
     reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses if the defendant 
     prevails in the action and the court finds that the claim of 
     the person bringing the action was clearly frivolous, clearly 
     vexatious, or brought primarily for purposes of harassment.
       (f) Government Not Liable for Certain Expenses.--The 
     Government is not liable for expenses which a person incurs 
     in bringing an action under this section.
       (g) Fees and Expenses to Prevailing Defendant.--In civil 
     actions brought under this section by the United States, the 
     provisions of section 2412 (d) of title 28 shall apply.
       (h) Whistleblower Protection.--
       (1) In general.--Any employee who is discharged, demoted, 
     suspended, threatened, harassed, or in any other manner 
     discriminated against in the terms and conditions of 
     employment by his or her employer because of lawful acts done 
     by the employee on behalf of the employee or others in 
     furtherance of an action under this section, including 
     investigation for, initiation of, testimony for, or 
     assistance in an action filed or to be filed under this 
     section, shall be entitled to all relief necessary to make 
     the employee whole.
       (2) Relief.--Relief under this subsection shall include 
     reinstatement with the same seniority status such employee 
     would have had but for the discrimination, 2 times the amount 
     of back pay, interest on the back pay, and compensation for 
     any special damages sustained as a result of the 
     discrimination, including litigation costs and reasonable 
     attorneys' fees. An employee may bring an action in the 
     appropriate district court of the United States for the 
     relief provided in this subsection.

     SEC. 5. JUDICIAL NOTICE.

       The courts of the United States shall take cognizance and 
     notice of any legal decision of the Government Accountability 
     Office interpreting the application of this Act.

     SEC. 6. POINT OF ORDER.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Reduction of salary.--It shall not be in order in the 
     House of Representatives or the Senate to consider a bill, 
     amendment, or resolution providing an appropriation for an 
     agency that the Government Accountability Office has found in 
     violation of this Act unless the appropriations for salary 
     and expenses for the head of the relevant agency contains a 
     provision reducing the salary of the head by an amount equal 
     to the illegal expenditure identified by the Government 
     Accountability Office. If the illegal expenditure exceeds the 
     annual salary of the agency head, then the point of order 
     shall continue until the remaining amount is subtracted from 
     the salary of the agency head.
       (2) Compliance.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply if the 
     agency is complying with the decision of the Government 
     Accountability Office.
       (b) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be 
     waived or suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote 
     of \3/5\ of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. An 
     affirmative vote of \3/5\ of the Members of the Senate, duly 
     chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain 
     an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order 
     raised under this section.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, we have to stop right now all the 
taxpayer-financed propaganda put out by our government to influence the 
American people. We need to expedite the investigations, begin 
congressional hearings, and pass specific new legislation to prevent 
the administration from using persons paid to pose as legitimate 
journalists to push for the Bush political agenda.
  Last week, we found out, according to the Washington Post, that 
another commentator, Maggie Gallagher, was paid $21,500 by the 
Department of Health and Human Services to promote the Bush 
administration's marriage agenda--a fact she didn't disclose to her 
readers while writing on the issue.
  As most of us now know, thanks to USA Today, the outgoing leadership 
of the Education Department secretly, and still unapologetically, paid 
$241,000 to commentator Armstrong Williams to influence his broadcasts. 
Mr. Williams was paid to comment favorably on the President's No Child 
Left Behind Act education reform plan, to conduct phony ``interviews'' 
with administration officials, and to encourage his colleagues in the 
media to do the same.
  The Gallagher and Williams payments were part of a multimillion 
dollar, taxpayer-funded public relations scheme to influence and 
undermine America's free press. Journalists were ranked on the 
favorability of their news coverage of President Bush on education. 
Phony video reports and interviews about the President's Medicare 
prescription drug law were broadcast as independent news on local 
television.
  All parties agree that this type of secret government paid journalism 
is wrong. Yet Ms. Gallagher and Mr. Williams continue to retain their 
$21,500 and $241,000 bribes.
  I am pleased to join Senator Lautenberg, who has been our leader on 
this issue, in introducing legislation to permanently prohibit the use 
of taxpayer funds for the type of manipulative payments that Ms. 
Gallagher and Mr. Williams received. Our legislation will prohibit 
agencies from issuing news releases, video news releases, and internet 
messages that do not clearly identify the government as financially 
responsible for the information.
  It will enforce these prohibitions by creating a mechanism to dock 
the pay of any Cabinet Secretary or agency head responsible, and by 
authorizing private citizens to bring a court action to recover 
taxpayer funds.
  Propaganda by the Department of Health and Human Services, the 
Department of Education, and the Office of Drug Control and Policy has 
to stop now, before the infection spreads. We cannot sit still in 
Congress while the administration corrupts the first amendment and 
freedom of the press.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Wyden, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 267. A bill to reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools and Community 
Self-Determination Act of 2000, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues and 
friends, Senator Wyden of Oregon and Senator Feinstein of California, 
to reauthorize a law that has stabilized payments to rural forest 
counties and, more important, has brought communities together to 
accomplish projects on the ground that improve watersheds and enhance 
habitat.
  It should be remembered that the National Forest System was formed in 
1905 from the Forest Reserves, which were established between 1891 and 
1905 by Presidential proclamation. During that time, 153 million acres 
of forestlands were set aside in Forest Reserves and removed from 
future settlement and economic development. This imposed great 
hardships on those counties that were in and adjacent to these new 
reserves. In many cases, 65 to 90 percent of the land in a county was 
sequestered in the new forest reserves, leaving little land for 
economic development and diminishing the potential tax base to support 
essential community infrastructure such as roads and

[[Page 1349]]

schools. There was considerable opposition in the forest counties to 
establishing these reserves.
  In 1908, in response to the mounting opposition to the reserves in 
the West, Congress passed a bill which created a revenue sharing 
mechanism to offset for forest counties the effects of removing these 
lands from economic development. The 1908 act specified that 10 percent 
of all revenues generated from the multiple-use management of our 
National Forests would be shared with the counties to support public 
roads and public schools. Several years later that percentage was 
increased to 25 percent. People in our forest counties refer to this as 
the ``Compact with the People of Rural Counties'' which was part of the 
foundation for establishing our National Forest System.
  It was the intent of Congress in establishing our National Forests, 
that they would be managed in a sustained multiple-use manner in 
perpetuity, and that they would provide revenues for local counties and 
the Federal treasury in perpetuity as well. And, from 1908 until about 
1993, this revenue sharing mechanism worked extremely well. However, 
from 1986 to the present, we have, for a variety of reasons, reduced 
our sustained active multiple-use management of the National Forests 
and the revenues have declined precipitously. Most counties have seen a 
decline of more than 85 percent in actual revenues generated on our 
National Forests and therefore an 85 percent reduction in 25 percent 
payments to counties which are used to help fund schools and county 
road departments.
  And more important, they have seen a 60-percent reduction in the 
economic activity that the federal timber sale programs generated in 
these counties. The Forest Service in its 1997 TSPIRS report estimates 
the total economic activity in these rural counties to be more than 
$2.1 billion, compared to more than $5.5 billion as recently as 1991.
  In 2000, Congress passed the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self 
Determination Act to address the needs of the National Forest counties 
and to focus on creating a new cooperative partnership between citizens 
in forest counties and our Federal land management agencies to develop 
forest health improvement projects on public lands and simultaneously 
stimulate job development and community economic stability.
  This Act restored the 1908 compact between the people of rural 
America and the Federal Government, and it has been an enormous success 
in achieving and even surpassing the goals of Congress.
  This is a remarkable success story for rural forest communities. 
These funds have restored and sustained essential infrastructure such 
as county schools and county roads through title I. Essential forest 
improvement proj-
ects have been completed through title II projects funded by forest 
counties, and planned by diverse stakeholder resource advisory 
committees. In Idaho, resource advisory committees are partnering with 
the Forest Service and other organizations to fight the spread of weeds 
on the Nez Perce National Forest, make road improvements in Hells 
Canyon National Recreation Area, and repair culverts and improve fish 
habitat on the Caribou-Targhee National Forest.
  These groups are reducing management gridlock and building 
collaborative public lands decisionmaking capacity in counties across 
America. These resource advisory committees are a real and working 
compact between the Federal land management agencies and rural 
communities that includes all interest groups; they represent a true 
coupling of community with land managers that is good for the land and 
good for the communities.
  Finally, essential services are being supported and developed in 
forest counties by investing title III funds. In Idaho, counties are 
using the funding as directed for search and rescue operations and 
youth employment and educational opportunities.
  The impact of this act over the last few years is positive and 
substantial. This law should be extended so it can continue to benefit 
the forest counties and their schools, and continue to contribute to 
improving the health of our National Forests.
  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. 267

       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 ``Secure Rural Schools and 
     Community Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY 
                   SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000.

       (a) Extension Through Fiscal Year 2013.--The Secure Rural 
     Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Public 
     Law 106-393; 16 U.S.C. 500 note) is amended--
       (1) in sections 101(a), 203(a)(1), 207(a), 208, 303, and 
     401, by striking ``2006'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``2013'';
       (2) in section 208, by striking ``2007'' and inserting 
     ``2014''; and
       (3) in section 303, by striking ``2007'' and inserting 
     ``2014,''.
       (b) Authority to Resume Receipt of 25- or 50-percent 
     Payments.--
       (1) 25-percent payments.--Section 102(b) of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is 
     amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``of the Treasury'' 
     after ``Secretary''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in the first sentence, by inserting ``, including such 
     an election made during the last quarter of fiscal year 2006 
     under this paragraph,'' after ``25-percent payment''; and
       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``fiscal year 
     2006'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2013, except that the 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall give the county the 
     opportunity to elect, in writing during the last quarter of 
     fiscal year 2006, to begin receiving the 25-percent payment 
     effective with the payment for fiscal year 2007''.
       (2) 50-percent payments.--Section 103(b)(1) of such Act is 
     amended by striking ``fiscal year 2006'' and inserting 
     ``fiscal year 2013, except that the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall give the county the opportunity to elect, in writing 
     during the last quarter of fiscal year 2006, to begin 
     receiving the 50-percent payment effective with the payment 
     for fiscal year 2007''.
       (c) Clarification Regarding Source of Payments.--
       (1) Payments to eligible states from national forest 
     lands.--Section 102(b)(3) of the Secure Rural Schools and 
     Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is amended--
       (A) by striking ``trust fund,'' and inserting ``trust 
     funds, permanent funds,'';
       (B) by inserting a comma after ``and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``If 
     the Secretary of the Treasury determines that a shortfall is 
     likely for a fiscal year, all revenues, fees, penalties, and 
     miscellaneous receipts referred to in the preceding sentence, 
     exclusive of required deposits to relevant trust funds, 
     permanent funds, and special accounts, that are received 
     during that fiscal year shall be reserved to make payments 
     under this section for that fiscal year.''.
       (2) Payments to eligible counties from blm lands.--Section 
     103(b)(2) of such Act is amended--
       (A) by striking ``trust fund,'' and inserting ``trust 
     funds'';
       (B) by inserting a comma after ``and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``If 
     the Secretary of the Treasury determines that a shortfall is 
     likely for a fiscal year, all revenues, fees, penalties, and 
     miscellaneous receipts referred to in the preceding sentence, 
     exclusive of required deposits to relevant trust funds and 
     permanent operating funds, that are received during that 
     fiscal year shall be reserved to make payments under this 
     section for that fiscal year.''.
       (d) Term for Resource Advisory Committee Members; 
     Reappointment.--Section 205(c)(1) of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is amended--
       (1) in the second sentence, by striking ``The Secretary 
     concerned may reappoint members to'' and inserting ``A member 
     of a resource advisory committee may be reappointed for one 
     or more''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new sentence: 
     ``Section 1803(c) of Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 (7 
     U.S.C. 2283(c)) shall not apply to a resource advisory 
     committee established by the Secretary of Agriculture.''.
       (e) Revision of Pilot Program.--Section 204(e)(3) of the 
     Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 
     2000 is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``The Secretary'' and 
     all that follows through ``approved projects'' and inserting 
     ``At the request of a resource advisory committee, the 
     Secretary concerned may establish a pilot program to 
     implement one or more of the projects proposed by the 
     resource advisory committee under section 203'';
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B);

[[Page 1350]]

       (3) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``by the Secretary 
     concerned'';
       (4) in subparagraph (D)--
       (A) by striking ``the pilot program'' in the first sentence 
     and inserting ``pilot programs established under subparagraph 
     (A)''; and
       (B) by striking ``the pilot program is'' in the second 
     sentence and inserting ``pilot programs are''; and
       (5) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E), as so 
     amended, as subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D).
       (f) Notification and Reporting Requirements Regarding 
     County Projects.--
       (1) Additional requirements.--Section 302 of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Notification and Reporting Requirements.--
       ``(1) Notification.--Not later than 90 days after the end 
     of each fiscal year during which county funds are obligated 
     for projects under this title, the participating county shall 
     submit to the Secretary concerned written notification 
     specifying--
       ``(A) each project for which the participating county 
     obligated county funds during that fiscal year;
       ``(B) the authorized use specified in subsection (b) that 
     the project satisfies; and
       ``(C) the amount of county funds obligated or expended 
     under the project during that fiscal year, including 
     expenditures on Federal lands, State lands, and private 
     lands.
       ``(2) Review.--The Secretary concerned shall review the 
     notifications submitted under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year 
     for the purpose of assessing the success of participating 
     counties in achieving the purposes of this title.
       ``(3) Annual report.--The Secretary concerned shall prepare 
     an annual report containing the results of the most-recent 
     review conducted under paragraph (2) and a summary of the 
     notifications covered by the review.
       ``(4) Submission of report.--The report required by 
     paragraph (3) for a fiscal year shall be submitted to the 
     Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Resources 
     of the House of Representatives not later than 150 days after 
     the end of that fiscal year.''.
       (2) Definition of secretary concerned.--Section 301 of such 
     Act is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) Secretary concerned.--The term `Secretary concerned' 
     means--
       ``(A) the Secretary of Agriculture or the designee of the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to county funds 
     reserved under section 102(d)(1)(B)(ii) for expenditure in 
     accordance with this title;
       ``(B) the Secretary of the Interior or the designee of the 
     Secretary of the Interior, with respect to county funds 
     reserved under section 103(c)(1)(B)(ii) for expenditure in 
     accordance with this title.''.
       (3) References to participating county.--Section 302(b) of 
     such Act is amended--
       (A) by striking ``An eligible county'' each place it 
     appears in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) and inserting ``A 
     participating county''; and
       (B) by striking ``A county'' each place it appears in 
     paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) and inserting ``A participating 
     county''.
       (g) Technical Correction.--Section 205(a)(3) of the Secure 
     Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is 
     amended by striking the comma after ``the Secretary concerned 
     may''.

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my very dear friend 
and colleague, Senator Craig of Idaho, as his principal cosponsor on 
legislation to reauthorize a law that has spawned a revolution in 
forest dependent communities in 42 States and in over 700 counties 
across the country. Our bill will reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools 
and Community Self Determination Act of 2000.
  This bill is short and simple but also extraordinary: it renews the 
original law and its programs for 8 more years. It also makes some 
technical and grammatical corrections to the original law and adds an 
oversight report on some of the projects done under this Act. As we 
introduce this bill today in the Senate, our friends and colleagues in 
the House are introducing the exact same bill with the same, bi-
partisan spirit.
  The reason we can pursue reauthorization of such a far reaching law 
with such little language is because the folks that it affects, the 
forest dependent communities, as well as the educators, the county 
leaders and the environmentalists in those communities, have made this 
law work. The reason we want to reauthorize this legislation is because 
these same folks want to continue the work this law allows them to do 
together, on federal and private lands, and in rural communities.
  The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of2000 
is sustaining rural communities as well as encouraging industry and 
creating jobs based on natural resources. If I may paraphrase a famous 
commercial to describe this legislation, I'd say:
  Stabilization of payments to counties for roads and schools--millions 
of dollars; Additional investments and the creation of new jobs through 
forest related projects--thousands of projects; Improving cooperative 
relationships among the people that use and care for federal lands: 
Priceless.
  Title I of the Act stabilizes funding for public education in rural 
communities. It also fortifies local government budgets that provide 
health and safety services in rural America, as well as maintains the 
transportation corridors that move people and material to and from 
forest communities.
  Title II of the Act provides resources for community-based 
stewardship for local federal lands. By establishing Resource Advisory 
Committees, RACs, tasked with reviewing and recommending to the Forest 
Service and Bureau of Land Management projects to be completed on 
Federal lands that benefit the community and the federal lands 
associated with that RAC, this Act has resulted in over a thousand 
projects making Federal lands more environmentally healthy today than 
before this Act passed in 2000. RACs enlist community members 
representing environmental interests, recreations users, farmers, local 
officials and forest products industry. This collaborative planning of 
management of local Federal lands has put people to work building fish-
friendly culverts; reducing hazardous fuel loads; enhancing picnic, 
camping and hiking facilities; and removing debris and noxious plant 
species.
  The kinds of projects the RACs have supported are varied: watershed 
restoration and maintenance; wild life habitat restoration; native 
fisheries habitat enhancement; forest health improvements; wild land 
fire hazard reduction; control of noxious weeds; removal of trash and 
illegal dumps; road maintenance and obliteration; trail maintenance and 
obliteration; and campground maintenance.
  Title III of the Act supports activities protecting federal 
infrastructure and the forest ecosystem. Fire Planning, emergency 
response, law enforcement and search and rescue services make 
federa1lands safe. They reinforce county government's commitment to the 
partnership between the Federal Government and local communities. These 
funds are being used to respond to forest fires conduct search and 
rescue missions and improve forest health while teaching at-risk 
children and rehabilitating prisoners in prison-work camp programs. 
Title III projects, like Title II projects, are also helping to develop 
cooperative projects between counties, local, State and Federal 
officials and agencies.
  The Act's greatest financial footprint is felt in the West, but 
financial benefits flow to counties nationwide. Significant investment 
in Federal lands has taken or will take place: $121 million from Title 
II and $124 million from Title III. At least 1,168 Title II projects 
were approved during the Act's first two years.
  Under the reauthorization we are sponsoring the payment amount will 
continue to be based on the average of timber receipts for the three 
top federal land timber production years: FY 1985 through FY 2000. 
Currently, on lands where there is no harvest and no safety net, the 
communities get no money. For those lands, funds will be provided from 
the general treasury. For others, there would be funds available, first 
from receipts but then from the general treasury. Still, for counties 
where the status quo is their best source of funds, they could stay 
with the status quo until they feel the need to use the safety net. No 
longer will there be an absolute a reliance on receipts, thus 
decreasing pressure on land managers to produce timber harvest for 
schools and counties. While there is widespread application of the Act, 
86 percent of counties nationwide have opted for the ``stable 
payment;'' under the reauthorization bill, if a county that has been 
part of this Act would like to opt out it may do so. It

[[Page 1351]]

is only fair to allow this, given that the county may have opted in by 
assuming the law would only last through 2006.
  Very strong support exists across the nation from stakeholders for 
renewal of the Act past fiscal year 2006.
  I urge my colleagues to work with me and my colleague across the 
aisle on this bi-partisan, bi-cameral effort to renew a law that is 
actually working on the ground.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Kohl, 
        Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. 
        Wyden):
  S. 268. A bill to provide competitive grants for training court 
reporters and closed captioners to meet requirements for realtime 
writers under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation, the 
Training for Realtime Writers Act of 2005, on behalf of myself and my 
colleagues, Senators Clinton, Cochran, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Lugar, 
Rockefeller, and Wyden.
  The 1996 Telecom Act required that all television broadcasts were to 
be captioned by 2006 and all Spanish language programming was to be 
captioned by 2010. This was a much needed reform that has helped 
millions of deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans to be able to take full 
advantage of television programming. Sadly, we have yet to meet that 
demand. It has been estimated that 3,000 captioners are needed to 
fulfill the 2006 mandate, and that number continues to increase as more 
and more broadband stations come online. Unfortunately, the United 
States has fallen behind in training these individuals. We must jump 
start training programs to get students in the pipeline and begin to 
address the need for Spanish language broadcasting.
  This is an issue that I feel very strongly about because my late 
brother, Frank, was deaf. I know personally that access to culture, 
news, and other media was important to him and to others in achieving a 
better quality of life. More than 28 million Americans, or 8 percent of 
the population, are considered deaf or hard of hearing and many require 
captioning services to participate in mainstream activities. In 1990, I 
authored legislation that required all television sets to be equipped 
with a computer chip to decode closed captioning. This bill completes 
the promise of that technology, affording deaf and hard of hearing 
Americans the same equality and access that captioning provides.
  But let me emphasize that the deaf and hard of hearing population is 
only one of a number of groups that will benefit from the legislation. 
The audience for captioning also includes individuals seeking to 
acquire or improve literacy skills, including approximately 27 million 
functionally illiterate adults, 3 to 4 million immigrants learning 
English as a second language, and 18 million children learning to read 
in grades kindergarten through 3. I see people using closed captioning 
to stay informed everywhere--from the gym to the airport. Here in the 
Senate, I would wager that many individuals on our staff have the 
captioning turned on right now to follow what is happening on the 
Senate floor while they go about conducting the meetings and phone 
calls that advance legislation. Captioning helps people educate 
themselves and helps all of us stay informed and entertained when audio 
isn't the most appropriate medium.
  Although the 2006 deadline is only 23 months away, our nation is 
facing a serious shortage of captioners. Over the past decade, student 
enrollment in programs that train court reporters to become realtime 
writers has decreased by 50 percent causing such programs to close on 
many campuses. Yet the need for these skills continues to rise. In 
fact, the rate of job placement upon graduation nears 100 percent. In 
addition, the majority of closed captioners are independent 
contractors. They are the small businesses that run the American 
economy and we should do everything we can to promote the creation and 
support of those businesses.
  That is why my colleagues and I are introducing this vital piece of 
legislation. The Training for Realtime Writers Act of 2005 would 
establish competitive grants to be used toward training real time 
captioners. This is necessary to ensure that we meet our goal set by 
the 1996 Telecom Act.
  The Senate Commerce Committee reported this bill unanimously last 
session, the full Senate has passed this Act without objection twice 
now, and we stand here today, once again at the beginning of the 
process. I ask my colleagues to join us once again in support of this 
legislation and join us in our effort to win its passage into law. 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. 268

       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 `Training for Realtime Writers 
     Act of 2005'.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) As directed by Congress in section 723 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 613), as added by 
     section 305 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 
     104-104; 110 Stat. 126), the Federal Communications 
     Commission adopted rules requiring closed captioning of most 
     television programming, which gradually require new video 
     programming to be fully captioned in English by 2006 and 
     Spanish by 2010.
       (2) More than 28,000,000 Americans, or 8 percent of the 
     population, are considered deaf or hard of hearing, and many 
     require captioning services to participate in mainstream 
     activities.
       (3) More than 24,000 children are born in the United States 
     each year with some form of hearing loss.
       (4) According to the Department of Health and Human 
     Services and a study done by the National Council on Aging--
       (A) 25 percent of Americans over 65 years old are hearing 
     impaired;
       (B) 33 percent of Americans over 70 years old are hearing 
     impaired; and
       (C) 41 percent of Americans over 75 years old are hearing 
     impaired.
       (5) The National Council on Aging study also found that 
     depression in older adults may be directly related to hearing 
     loss and disconnection with the spoken word.
       (6) Empirical research demonstrates that captions improve 
     the performance of individuals learning to read English and, 
     according to numerous Federal agency statistics, could 
     benefit--
       (A) 3,700,000 remedial readers;
       (B) 12,000,000 young children learning to read;
       (C) 27,000,000 illiterate adults; and (D) 30,000,000 people 
     for whom English is a second language.
       (7) Over the past decade, student enrollment in programs 
     that train realtime writers and closed captioners has 
     decreased by 50%, even though job placement upon graduation 
     is 100%.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANT PROGRAM TO PROMOTE TRAINING 
                   AND JOB PLACEMENT OF REAL TIME WRITERS.

       (a) In General.--The National Telecommunications and 
     Information Administration shall make competitive grants to 
     eligible entities under subsection
       (b) to promote training and placement of individuals, 
     including individuals who have completed a court reporting 
     training program, as realtime writers in order to meet the 
     requirements for closed captioning of video programming set 
     forth in section 723 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
     U.S.C. 613) and the rules prescribed thereunder.
       (b) Eligiible Entities.--For purposes of this Act, an 
     eligible entity is a court reporting program that--
       (1) can document and demonstrate to the Secretary of 
     Commerce that it meets minimum standards of educational and 
     financial accountability, with a curriculum capable of 
     training realtime writers qualified to provide captioning 
     services;
       (2) is accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by 
     the Department of Education; and
       (3) is participating in student aid programs under title IV 
     of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
       (c) Priority in Grants.--In determining whether to make 
     grants under this section, the Secretary of Commerce shall 
     give a priority to eligible entities that, as determined by 
     the Secretary of Commerce--
       (1) possess the most substantial capability to increase 
     their capacity to train realtime writers;
       (2) demonstrate the most promising collaboration with local 
     educational institutions, businesses, labor organizations, or 
     other community groups having the potential to train or 
     provide job placement assistance to realtime writers; or

[[Page 1352]]

       (3) propose the most promising and innovative approaches 
     for initiating or expanding training and job placement 
     assistance efforts with respect to realtime writers.
       (d) Duration of Grant.--A grant under this section shall be 
     for a period of two years.
       (e) Maximum Amount of Grant.--The amount of a grant 
     provided under subsection (a) to an entity eligible may not 
     exceed $1,500,000 for the two-year period of the grant under 
     subsection (d).

     SEC. 4. APPLICATION.

       (a) In General.--To receive a grant under section 3, an 
     eligible entity shall submit an application to the National 
     Telecommunications and Information Administration at such 
     time and in such manner as the Administration may require. 
     The application shall contain the information set forth under 
     subsection (b).
       (b) Information.--Information in the application of an 
     eligible entity under subsection (a) for a grant under 
     section 3 shall include the following:
       (1) A description of the training and assistance to be 
     funded using the grant amount, including how such training 
     and assistance will increase the number of realtime writers.
       (2) A description of performance measures to be utilized to 
     evaluate the progress of individuals receiving such training 
     and assistance in matters relating to enrollment, completion 
     of training, and job placement and retention.
       (3) A description of the manner in which the eligible 
     entity will ensure that recipients of scholarships, if any, 
     funded by the grant will be employed and retained as realtime 
     writers.
       (4) A description of the manner in which the eligible 
     entity intends to continue providing the training and 
     assistance to be funded by the grant after the end of the 
     grant period, including any partnerships or arrangements 
     established for that purpose.
       (5) A description of how the eligible entity will work with 
     local workforce investment boards to ensure that training and 
     assistance to be funded with the grant will further local 
     workforce goals, including the creation of educational 
     opportunities for individuals who are from economically 
     disadvantaged backgrounds or are displaced workers.
       (6) Additional information, if any, of the eligibility of 
     the eligible entity for priority in the making of grants 
     under section 3(c).
       (7) Such other information as the Administration may 
     require.

     SEC. 5. USE OF FUNDS.

       (a) In General.--An eligible entity receiving a grant under 
     section 3 shall use the grant amount for purposes relating to 
     the recruitment, training and assistance, and job placement 
     of individuals, including individuals who have completed a 
     court reporting training program, as realtime writers, 
     including--
       (1) recruitment;
       (2) subject to subsection (b), the provision of 
     scholarships;
       (3) distance learning;
       (4) further develop and implement both English and Spanish 
     curriculum to more effectively train realtime writing skills, 
     and education in the knowledge necessary for the delivery of 
     high-quality closed captioning services;
       (5) mentor students to ensure successful completion of the 
     realtime training and provide assistance in job placement;
       (6) encourage individuals with disabilities to pursue a 
     career in realtime writing; and
       (7) the employment and payment of personnel for such 
     purposes.
       (b) Scholarships.--
       (1) Amount.--The amount of a scholarship under subsection 
     (a)(2) shall be based on the amount of need of the recipient 
     of the scholarship for financial assistance, as determined in 
     accordance with part F of title IV of the Higher Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087kk).
       (2) Agreement.--Each recipient of a scholarship under 
     subsection (a)(2) shall enter into an agreement with the 
     National Telecommunications and Information Administration to 
     provide realtime writing services for a period of time (as 
     determined by the Administration) that is appropriate (as so 
     determined) for the amount of the scholarship received.
       (3) Coursework and Employment.--The Administration shall 
     establish requirements for coursework and employment for 
     recipients of scholarships under subsection (a)(2), including 
     requirements for repayment of scholarship amounts in the 
     event of failure to meet such requirements for coursework and 
     employment. Requirements for repayment of scholarship amounts 
     shall take into account the effect of economic conditions on 
     the capacity of scholarship recipients to find work as 
     realtime writers.
       (c) Administrative Costs.--The recipient of a grant under 
     section 3 may not use more than 5 percent of the grant amount 
     to pay administrative costs associated with activities funded 
     by the grant.
       (d) Supplement Not Supplant.--Grant amounts under this Act 
     shall supplement and not supplant other Federal or non-
     Federal funds of the grant recipient for purposes of 
     promoting the training and placement of individuals as 
     realtime writers

     SEC. 6. REPORTS.

       (a) Annual Reports.--Each eligible entity receiving a grant 
     under section 3 shall submit to the National 
     Telecommunications and Information Administration, at the end 
     of each year of the grant period, a report on the activities 
     of such entity with respect to the use of grant amounts 
     during such year.
       (b) Report Information.--
       (1) In General.--Each report of an entity for a year under 
     subsection (a) shall include a description of the use of 
     grant amounts by the entity during such year, including an 
     assessment by the entity of the effectiveness of activities 
     carried out using such funds in increasing the number of 
     realtime writers. The assessment shall utilize the 
     performance measures submitted by the entity in the 
     application for the grant under section 4(b).
       (2) Final Report.--The final report of an entity on a grant 
     under subsection (a) shall include a description of the best 
     practices identified by the entity as a result of the grant 
     for increasing the number of individuals who are trained, 
     employed, and retained in employment as realtime writers.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act, amounts as follows:
       (1) $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 
     2008.
       (2) Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2009.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. 
        Kohl, Mr. Jeffords, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Pryor, Mr. 
        Leahy, Mr. Levin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. 
        Harkin, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Bayh, and Mr. Obama):
  S. 269. A bill to provide emergency relief to small business concerns 
affected by a significant increase in the price of heating oil, natural 
gas, propane, or kerosene, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, tonight the President will deliver his 
fifth State of the Union address. It is expected that he will, in that 
address, talk about his plan to expand the ownership of businesses, as 
he did in his Inaugural Address. As a long-time member of the Senate 
Committee on Small Business & Entrepreneurship, I hope that the 
administration will also tend to the needs of small businesses that 
already exist, in particular those struggling to make ends meet with 
the record high cost of heating fuels. It could be done very easily by 
making those small businesses eligible to apply for low-cost disaster 
loans through the Small Business Administration's Economic Injury 
Disaster Loan Program. And by making small farms and agricultural 
businesses eligible for loans through a similar loan program at the 
Department of Agriculture.
  There has been a bipartisan push for this assistance in Congress 
twice in the past few years, most recently in November during the 
consideration of the mega funding bill, the FY2005 Omnibus 
Appropriations Conference Report. It makes no sense that out of 3,000 
pages of legislation and almost $400 billion in spending, the White 
House and the Republican leadership, opposing members in their own 
party, refused to help the little guy. While it would have been most 
helpful to these businesses--from small heating oil dealers to small 
manufacturers--to enact the legislation in November when the prices 
were at an all-time high, we can still be helpful now.
  In that spirit, together with Senator Reed and 17 of my colleagues, I 
am re-introducing the Small Business and Farm Energy Emergency Relief 
Act. I thank Senators Reed, Dodd, Bingaman, Kohl, Jeffords, Cantwell, 
Johnson, Pryor, Leahy, Levin, Schumer, Lieberman, Clinton, Harkin, 
Kennedy, Bayh and Obama. In the past, this assistance has been 
supported by many Republicans, and I hope they will again cosponsor the 
legislation. I have reached out to them in hopes that they will once 
again work in a bipartisan way to help our small businesses. I know the 
heating oil issue is important to Senator Snowe, my colleague and 
chairman of the Committee on Small Business & Entrepreneurship, and I 
look forward to working with her. I am hopeful that she will cosponsor 
this bill and agree to take action on it in Committee as soon as 
possible.
  We have built a very clear record over the years on how this 
legislation would work and why it is needed. Let me take a few minutes 
to summarize

[[Page 1353]]

those conclusions. The Small Business and Farm Energy Emergency Relief 
Act of 2005 would provide emergency relief, through affordable, low-
interest SBA and USDA Disaster loans, to small businesses adversely 
affected by, or likely to be adversely affected by, significant 
increases in the prices of four heating fuels--heating oil, propane, 
kerosene, and natural gas. This would be helpful, because for those 
businesses in danger of or already suffering from significant economic 
injury caused by crippling increases in the costs of heating fuel, they 
need access to capital to mitigate or avoid serious losses. However, 
commercial lenders typically won't make loans to these small businesses 
because they often don't have the increased cash flow to demonstrate 
the ability to repay the loan.
  Economic injury disaster loans give affected small businesses 
necessary working capital until normal operations resume, or until they 
can restructure or change the business to address the market changes. 
These are direct loans, made through the SBA, with interest rates of 4 
percent or less. The SBA tailors the repayment of each economic injury 
disaster loan to each borrower's financial capability, enabling them to 
avoid the robbing Peter to pay Paul syndrome, as they juggle bills.
  In practical terms, SBA considers economic injury to be when a small 
business is unable, or likely to be unable, to meet its obligations as 
they mature or to pay its ordinary and necessary operating expenses. To 
be eligible to apply for an economic injury loan, you must be a small 
business that has been the victim of some kind of disaster, you must 
have used all reasonably available funds, and you must be unable to 
obtain credit elsewhere.
  Under this program, the disaster must be declared by the President, 
the SBA Administrator, or a governor at the discretion of the 
Administrator. Small businesses will have nine months to apply from 
October 1, 2004 or, for future disasters, from the day a disaster is 
declared.
  This bill differs from the legislation we put forward in 2001 in that 
it uses a different trigger to define a disaster. For this legislation, 
Senator Reed worked closely with the Department of Energy to identify 
what would be considered extreme price jumps in the heating fuels of 
heating oil, natural gas, and propane. Therefore, the assistance under 
this bill would become available when the price jumps 40 percent, when 
compared to the same period for the two previous years, when absorbing 
the cost becomes nearly impossible.
  Mr. President, I again ask that my colleagues get behind this bill 
and make it law as soon as possible. I ask unanimous consent that a 
copy of a bipartisan letter of support, a copy of the cosponsors from 
the 107th Congress, and a copy of the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                November 16, 2004.
     Hon. Ted Stevens,
     Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate, 
         Washington, DC.
     Hon. Judd Gregg,
     Chairman, Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, 
         State, and the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Robert C. Byrd,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate, 
         Washington, DC.
     Hon. Fritz F. Hollings,
     Ranking Member, Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, 
         Justice, State, and the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Stevens, Byrd, Gregg and Hollings: We are 
     writing to request you include a provision in the fiscal year 
     2005 Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report to make heating 
     oil distributors and other small businesses harmed by 
     substantial increases in energy prices eligible for Small 
     Business Administration (SBA) disaster loans. Many small 
     businesses are being adversely affected by the substantial 
     increases in the prices of heating oil, propane, kerosene and 
     natural gas. The recent volatile and substantial increases in 
     the cost of these fuels is placing a tremendous burden on the 
     financial resources of small businesses, which typically have 
     small cash flows and narrow operating margins.
       Heating oil and propane distributors, in particular, are 
     being impacted. Heating oil and propane distributors purchase 
     oil through wholesalers. Typically, the distributor has 10 
     days to pay for the oil. The money is pulled directly from a 
     line of credit either at a bank or with the wholesaler. Given 
     the high cost of heating oil, distributors' purchasing power 
     is much lower this year compared to previous years. In 
     addition, the distributors often do not receive payments from 
     customers until 30 days or more after delivery; therefore, 
     their financial resources for purchasing oil for customers 
     and running their business are limited. Heating oil and 
     propane dealers need to borrow money on a short-term basis to 
     maintain economic viability. Commercial lenders typically 
     will not make loans to these small businesses because they 
     usually do not have the increased cash flows to demonstrate 
     the ability to repay the loan. Without sufficient credit, 
     these small businesses will struggle to purchase the heating 
     fuels they need to supply residential customers, businesses 
     and public facilities, such as schools. These loans would 
     provide affected small businesses with the working capital 
     needed until normal operations resume or until they can 
     restructure to address the market changes.
       SBA's disaster loans are appropriate sources of funding to 
     address this problem. The hurricanes that caused significant 
     damage to the Gulf Coast along with the current instability 
     in Iraq, Nigeria and Russia caused a surge in the price of 
     oil and important refined products, especially heating fuels. 
     The conditions restricting these small businesses' access to 
     capital are beyond their control and SBA loans can fill this 
     gap when the private sector does not meet the credit needs of 
     small businesses.
       A similar provision passed the Small Business Committee and 
     Senate with broad bipartisan support during the 10th Congress 
     when these small businesses faced a substantial increase in 
     energy prices. In addition, there is precedence for this 
     proposal, as a similar provision was enacted in the 104th 
     Congress to help commercial fisheries failures.
       Thank you for your consideration. Please find enclosed 
     suggested draft language for the proposal. If your staff has 
     questions about the proposal or the impacts of the current 
     energy price increases on small businesses, please ask them 
     to contact Kris Sarri at 224-0606.
           Sincerely,
         Jack Reed, John F. Kerry, Arlen Specter, Christopher J. 
           Dodd, Edward M. Kennedy, James M. Jeffords, Evan Bayh, 
           Susan M. Collins, Jeff Bingaman, Patrick J. Leahy, 
           Lincoln D. Chafee, Frank Lautenberg, Joseph I. 
           Lieberman, Charles E. Schumer, Paul S. Sarbanes, 
           Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barbara A. Mikulski.
                                  ____


             Bill Summary and Status for the 107th Congress

       Title: A bill to provide emergency relief to small 
     businesses affected by significant increases in the prices of 
     heating oil, natural gas, propane, and kerosene, and for 
     other purposes.
       Sponsor: Sen Kerry, John F. [D-MA] (introduced 2/8/2001); 
     Cosponsors: 34.
       Committees: Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship; 
     House Small Business; House Agriculture.
       Senate Reports: 107-4.
       Latest Major Action: 5/1712001--Referred to House 
     subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on 
     Conservation, Credit, Rural Development and Research.


                        COSPONSORS, ALPHABETICAL

     Sen Akaka, Daniel K. [D-HI]
     Sen Bayh, Evan [D-IN]
     Sen Bond, Christopher S. [R-MO]
     Sen Chafee, Lincoln D. [R-RI]
     Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [D-NY]
     Sen Corzine, Jon [D-NJ]
     Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT]
     Sen Edwards, John [D-NC]
     Sen Harkin, Tom [D-IA]
     Sen Jeffords, James M. [R-VT]
     Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA]
     Sen Landrieu, Mary [D-LA]
     Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI]
     Sen Murray, Patty [D-WA]
     Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
     Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME]
     Sen Torricelli, Robert G. [D-NJ]
     Sen Baucus, Max [D-MT]
     Sen Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM]
     Sen Cantwell, Maria [D-WA]
     Sen Cleland, Max [D-GA]
     Sen Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]
     Sen Daschle, Thomas A. [D-SD]
     Sen Domenici, Pete V. [R-NM]
     Sen Enzi, Michael B. [R-WY]
     Sen Inouye, Daniel K. [D-HI]
     Sen Johnson, Tim [D-SD]
     Sen Kohl, Herb [D-WI]
     Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT]
     Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [D-CT]
     Sen Reed, John F. [D-RI]
     Sen Smith, Bob [R-NH]
     Sen Specter, Arlen [R-PA]
     Sen Wellstone, Paul D. [D-MN]
                                  ____


                                 S. 269

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

[[Page 1354]]



     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Small Business and Farm 
     Energy Emergency Relief Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) a significant number of small businesses in the United 
     States, non-farm as well as agricultural producers, use 
     heating oil, natural gas, propane, or kerosene to heat their 
     facilities and for other purposes;
       (2) a significant number of small business concerns in the 
     United States sell, distribute, market, or otherwise engage 
     in commerce directly related to heating oil, natural gas, 
     propane, and kerosene; and
       (3) significant increases in the price of heating oil, 
     natural gas, propane, or kerosene--
       (A) disproportionately harm small businesses dependent on 
     those fuels or that use, sell, or distribute those fuels in 
     the ordinary course of their business, and can cause them 
     substantial economic injury;
       (B) can negatively affect the national economy and regional 
     economies;
       (C) have occurred in the winters of 1983-1984, 1988-1989, 
     1996-1997, 1999-2000, 2000-2001, and 2004-2005; and
       (D) can be caused by a host of factors, including 
     international conflicts, global or regional supply 
     difficulties, weather conditions, insufficient inventories, 
     refinery capacity, transportation, and competitive structures 
     in the markets, causes that are often unforeseeable to, and 
     beyond the control of, those who own and operate small 
     businesses.

     SEC. 3. SMALL BUSINESS ENERGY EMERGENCY DISASTER LOAN 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting after paragraph (3) 
     the following:
       ``(4)(A) In this paragraph--
       ``(i) the term `base price index' means the moving average 
     of the closing unit price on the New York Mercantile Exchange 
     for heating oil, natural gas, or propane for the 10 days, in 
     each of the most recent 2 preceding years, which correspond 
     to the trading days described in clause (ii);
       ``(ii) the term `current price index' means the moving 
     average of the closing unit price on the New York Mercantile 
     Exchange, for the 10 most recent trading days, for contracts 
     to purchase heating oil, natural gas, or propane during the 
     subsequent calendar month, commonly known as the `front 
     month';
       ``(iii) the term `heating fuel' means heating oil, natural 
     gas, propane, or kerosene; and
       ``(iv) the term `significant increase' means--
       ``(I) with respect to the price of heating oil, natural 
     gas, or propane, any time the current price index exceeds the 
     base price index by not less than 40 percent; and
       ``(II) with respect to the price of kerosene, any increase 
     which the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary 
     of Energy, determines to be significant.
       ``(B) The Administration may make such loans, either 
     directly or in cooperation with banks or other lending 
     institutions through agreements to participate on an 
     immediate or deferred basis, to assist a small business 
     concern that has suffered or that is likely to suffer 
     substantial economic injury as the result of a significant 
     increase in the price of heating fuel.
       ``(C) Any loan or guarantee extended pursuant to this 
     paragraph shall be made at the same interest rate as economic 
     injury loans under paragraph (2).
       ``(D) No loan may be made under this paragraph, either 
     directly or in cooperation with banks or other lending 
     institutions through agreements to participate on an 
     immediate or deferred basis, if the total amount outstanding 
     and committed to the borrower under this subsection would 
     exceed $1,500,000, unless such borrower constitutes a major 
     source of employment in its surrounding area, as determined 
     by the Administration, in which case the Administration, in 
     its discretion, may waive the $1,500,000 limitation.
       ``(E) For purposes of assistance under this paragraph--
       ``(i) a declaration of a disaster area based on conditions 
     specified in this paragraph shall be required, and shall be 
     made by the President or the Administrator; or
       ``(ii) if no declaration has been made pursuant to clause 
     (i), the Governor of a State in which a significant increase 
     in the price of heating fuel has occurred may certify to the 
     Administration that small business concerns have suffered 
     economic injury as a result of such increase and are in need 
     of financial assistance which is not otherwise available on 
     reasonable terms in that State, and upon receipt of such 
     certification, the Administration may make such loans as 
     would have been available under this paragraph if a disaster 
     declaration had been issued.
       ``(F) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, loans 
     made under this paragraph may be used by a small business 
     concern described in subparagraph (B) to convert from the use 
     of heating fuel to a renewable or alternative energy source, 
     including agriculture and urban waste, geothermal energy, 
     cogeneration, solar energy, wind energy, or fuel cells.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Heating Fuel.--
     Section 3(k) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(k)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``, significant increase in the price of 
     heating fuel'' after ``civil disorders''; and
       (2) by inserting ``other'' before ``economic''.

     SEC. 4. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCER EMERGENCY LOANS.

       (a) In General.--Section 321(a) of the Consolidated Farm 
     and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence--
       (A) by striking ``operations have'' and inserting 
     ``operations (i) have''; and
       (B) by inserting before ``: Provided,'' the following: ``, 
     or (ii)(I) are owned or operated by such an applicant that is 
     also a small business concern (as defined in section 3 of the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)), and (II) have suffered 
     or are likely to suffer substantial economic injury on or 
     after October 1, 2004, as the result of a significant 
     increase in energy costs or input costs from energy sources 
     occurring on or after October 1, 2004, in connection with an 
     energy emergency declared by the President or the 
     Secretary'';
       (2) in the third sentence, by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``or by an energy emergency 
     declared by the President or the Secretary''; and
       (3) in the fourth sentence--
       (A) by inserting ``or energy emergency'' after ``natural 
     disaster'' each place that term appears; and
       (B) by inserting ``or declaration'' after ``emergency 
     designation''.
       (b) Funding.--Funds available on the date of enactment of 
     this Act for emergency loans under subtitle C of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961 et 
     seq.) shall be available to carry out the amendments made by 
     subsection (a) to meet the needs resulting from natural 
     disasters .

     SEC. 5. GUIDELINES AND RULEMAKING.

       (a) Guidelines.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration and the Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall each issue such guidelines as the Administrator or the 
     Secretary, as applicable, determines to be necessary to carry 
     out this Act and the amendments made by this Act.
       (b) Rulemaking.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration, after consultation with the 
     Secretary of Energy, shall promulgate regulations specifying 
     the method for determining a significant increase in the 
     price of kerosene under section 7(b)(4)(A)(iv)(II) of the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(4)(A)(iv)(II)).

     SEC. 6. REPORTS.

       (a) Small Business Administration.--Not later than 12 
     months after the date on which the Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration issues guidelines under section 5, 
     and annually thereafter, the Administrator shall submit to 
     the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House of 
     Representatives, a report on the effectiveness of the 
     assistance made available under section 7(b)(4) of the Small 
     Business Act, as added by this Act, including--
       (1) the number of small business concerns that applied for 
     a loan under such section and the number of those that 
     received such loans;
       (2) the dollar value of those loans;
       (3) the States in which the small business concerns that 
     received such loans are located;
       (4) the type of heating fuel or energy that caused the 
     significant increase in the cost for the participating small 
     business concerns; and
       (5) recommendations for ways to improve the assistance 
     provided under such section 7(b)(4), if any.
       (b) Department of Agriculture.--Not later than 12 months 
     after the date on which the Secretary of Agriculture issues 
     guidelines under section 5, and annually thereafter, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Small Business and 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Small Business and Agriculture of the House of 
     Representatives, a report that--
       (1) describes the effectiveness of the assistance made 
     available under section 7(b)(4) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(b)(4)); and
       (2) contains recommendations for ways to improve the 
     assistance provided under such section 7(b)(4), if any.

     SEC. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) Small Business.--The amendments made by this Act shall 
     apply during the 4-year period beginning on the date on which 
     guidelines are published by the Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration under section 5, with respect to 
     assistance under section 7(b)(4) of the Small Business Act, 
     as added by this Act, to economic injury suffered or likely 
     to be suffered as the result of a significant increase in the 
     price of heating fuel occurring on or after October 1, 2004; 
     or
       (b) Agriculture.--The amendments made by section 4 shall 
     apply during the 4-year period beginning on the date on which 
     guidelines are published by the Secretary of Agriculture 
     under section 5.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LUGAR:

[[Page 1355]]

  S. 270. A bill to provide a framework for consideration by the 
legislative and executive branches of proposed unilateral economic 
sanctions in order to ensure coordination of United States policy with 
respect to trade, security, and human rights; to the Committee on 
Foreign Relations.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Sanctions Policy 
Reform Act.
  The fundamental purpose of my bill is to promote good governance 
through thoughtful deliberation on those proposals involving unilateral 
economic sanctions directed against other countries. My bill lays out a 
set of guidelines and requirements for a careful and deliberative 
process in both branches of government when considering new unilateral 
sanctions. It does not preclude the use of economic sanctions nor does 
it change those sanctions already in force. It is based on the 
principle that if we improve the quality of our policy process and 
public discourse, we can improve the quality of the policy itself.
  Numerous studies have shown that unilateral sanctions rarely succeed 
and often harm the United States more than the target country. 
Sanctions can jeopardize billions of dollars in U.S. export earnings 
and hundreds of thousands of American jobs. They frequently weaken our 
international competitiveness by yielding to other countries those 
markets and opportunities that we abandon. They also can undermine our 
ability to provide humanitarian assistance abroad.
  Unilateral sanctions often appear to be cost-free, but they have many 
unintended victims--the poor in the target countries, American 
companies, American labor, American consumers and, quite frankly, 
American foreign policy. Sanctions can weaken our international 
competitiveness, lower our global market share, abandon our established 
market to others and jeopardize billions in export earnings--the key to 
our economic growth. They may also impair our ability to provide 
humanitarian assistance. They sometimes anger our friends and call our 
international leadership into question. In many cases, unilateral 
sanctions are well-intentioned, but impotent, serving only to create 
the illusion of U.S. action. In the worst cases, unilateral sanctions 
are actually undermining our own interests in the world.
  Unilateral sanctions do have a place in our foreign policy. There 
will always be situations in which the actions of other countries are 
so egregious or so threatening to the United States that some response 
by the United States, short of the use of military force, is needed and 
justified. In these instances, sanctions can be helpful in getting the 
attention of another country, in showing U.S. determination to change 
behaviors we find objectionable, or in stimulating a search for 
creative solutions to difficult foreign policy problems.
  But decisions to impose them must be fully considered and debated. 
Too frequently, this does not happen. Unilateral sanctions are often 
the result of a knee-jerk impulse to take action, combined with a timid 
desire to avoid the risks and commitments involved in more potent 
foreign policy steps that have greater potential to protect American 
interests. We must avoid putting U.S. national security in a straight-
jacket, and we must have a clear idea of the consequences of sanctions 
on our own security and prosperity before we enact them.
  To this end, I am offering this bill to reform the U.S. sanctions 
decision-making process. The bill will establish procedural guidelines 
and informational requirements that must be met prior to the imposition 
of unilateral economic sanctions. For example, before imposing 
unilateral sanctions, Congress would be required to consider findings 
by executive branch officials that evaluate the impact of the proposed 
sanctions on American agriculture, energy requirements, and capital 
markets. The bill mandates that we be better informed about the 
prospects that our sanctions will succeed, about the economic costs to 
the United States, and about the sanctions' impact on other American 
objectives.
  In addition, this sanctions policy reform bill provides for more 
active consultation between the Congress and the President and for 
Presidential waiver authority if the President determines it is in our 
national security interests. It also establishes an executive branch 
Sanctions Review Committee, which will be tasked with evaluating the 
effect of any proposed sanctions and providing appropriate 
recommendations to the President prior to the imposition of such 
sanctions.
  The bill would have no effect on existing sanctions. It would apply 
only to new sanctions that are enacted after this bill became law. It 
also would apply only to sanctions that are unilateral and that are 
intended to achieve foreign policy goals. As such, it excludes trade 
remedies or trade sanctions imposed because of market access 
restrictions, unfair trade practices, or violations of U.S. commercial 
or trade laws.
  Let me suggest a number of fundamental principles that I believe 
should shape our approach to unilateral economic sanctions: unilateral 
economic sanctions should not be the policy of first resort (to the 
extent possible, other means of persuasion ought to be exhausted 
first); if harm is to be done or is intended, we must follow the 
cardinal principle that we plan to harm our adversary more than we harm 
ourselves; when possible, multilateral economic sanctions and 
international cooperation are preferable to unilateral sanctions and 
are more likely to succeed, even though they may be more difficult to 
obtain; we ought to avoid double standards and be as consistent as 
possible in the application of our sanctions policy; to the extent 
possible, we ought to avoid disproportionate harm to the civilian 
population (we should avoid the use of food as a weapon of foreign 
policy and we should permit humanitarian assistance programs to 
function); our foreign policy goals ought to be clear, specific and 
achievable within a reasonable period of time; we ought to keep to a 
minimum the adverse affects of our sanctions on our friends and allies; 
we should keep in mind that unilateral sanctions can cause adverse 
consequences that may be more problematic than the actions that 
prompted the sanctions--a regime collapse, a humanitarian disaster, a 
mass exodus of people, or more repression and isolation in the target 
country, for example; we should explore options for solving problems 
through dialogue, public diplomacy, and positive inducements or 
rewards; the President of the United States should always have options 
that include both sticks and carrots that can be adjusted according to 
circumstance and nuance (the Congress should be vigilant by ensuring 
that his options are consistent with Congressional intent and the law); 
and in those cases where we do impose sanctions unilaterally, our 
actions must be part of a coherent and coordinated foreign policy that 
is coupled with diplomacy and consistent with our international 
obligations and objectives.
  An unexamined reliance on unilateral sanctions may be appropriate for 
a third-rate power whose foreign policy interests lie primarily in 
satisfying domestic constituencies or cultivating a self-righteous 
posture. But the United States is the world's only superpower. Our own 
prosperity and security, as well as the future of the world, depend on 
a vigorous and effective assertion of our international interests.
  The United States should never abandon its leadership role in the 
world, nor forsake the basic values we cherish. We must ask, however, 
whether we are always able to change the actions of other countries 
whose behavior we find disagreeable or threatening. If we are able to 
influence those actions, we need to ponder how best to proceed. In my 
judgment, unilateral economic sanctions will not always be the best 
answer. But, if they are the answer, they should be structured so that 
they do as little harm as possible to our global interests. By 
improving upon our procedures and the quality and timeliness of our 
information when considering new sanctions, I believe U.S. foreign 
policy will be more effective.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Lott, Mr.

[[Page 1356]]

        Lieberman, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Collins, and Mr. 
        Salazar):
  S. 271. A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 
clarify when organizations described in section 527 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 must register as political committees, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by my good 
friends and colleagues Senators Feingold from Wisconsin, and Lott from 
Mississippi, and our good friends who lead the campaign finance reform 
fight in the House, Representatives Shays and Meehan, in introducing a 
bill to end the illegal practice of 527 groups spending soft money on 
ads and other activities to influence Federal elections.
  As my colleagues know, a number of 527 groups raised and spent a 
substantial amount of soft money in a blatant effort to influence the 
outcome of last year's Presidential election. These activities are 
illegal under existing laws, and yet once again, the Federal Election 
Commission, FEC, has failed to do its job and has refused to do 
anything to stop these illegal activities. Therefore, we must pursue 
all possible steps to overturn the FEC's misinterpretation of the 
campaign finance laws, which is improperly allowing 527 groups whose 
purpose is to influence Federal elections to spend soft money on these 
efforts.
  According to an analysis by campaign finance scholar Tony Corrado, 
Federally oriented 527s spent $423 million on the 2004 elections. The 
same analysis shows that ten donors gave at least $4 million each to 
527s involved in the 2004 elections and two donors each contributed 
over $20 million.
  In September, we filed a lawsuit to overturn the FEC's failure to 
issue regulations to stop these illegal practices by 527 groups. 
President Bush and his campaign filed a similar lawsuit against the FEC 
as well, and I also appreciate President Bush's support for the 
legislative effort we begin today on 527s. Today, we are introducing 
legislation that will accomplish the same result. We are going to 
follow every possible avenue to stop 527 groups from effectively 
breaking the law, and doing what they are already prohibited from doing 
by longstanding laws.
  The bill we introduce today is simple. It would require that all 527s 
register as political committees and comply with Federal campaign 
finance laws, including Federal limits on the contributions they 
receive, unless the money they raise and spend is only in connection 
with non-Federal candidate elections, State or local ballot 
initiatives, or the nomination or confirmation of individuals to non-
elected offices.
  Additionally, this legislation would set new rules for Federal 
political committees that spend funds on voter mobilization efforts 
effecting both Federal and local races and, therefore, use both a 
Federal and a non-Federal account under FEC regulations. The new rules 
would prevent unlimited soft money from being channeled into Federal 
election activities by these Federal political committees.
  Under the new rules, at least half of the funds spent on these voter 
mobilization activities by Federal political committees would have to 
be hard money from their Federal account. More importantly, the funds 
raised for their non-Federal account would have to come from 
individuals and would be limited to no more than $25,000 per year per 
donor. Corporations and labor unions could not contribute to these non-
Federal accounts. To put it in simple terms, a George Soros could give 
$25,000 per year as opposed to $10 million to finance these activities.
  Let me be perfectly clear on one point here. Our proposal will not 
shut down 527s, it will simply require them to abide by the same 
Federal regulations every other Federal political committee must abide 
by in spending money to influence Federal elections.
  It is unfortunate that we even need to be here introducing this bill 
today. This legislation would not be necessary if it weren't for the 
abject failure of the FEC to enforce existing law. As my colleagues 
well know, some organizations, registered under section 527 of the 
Internal Revenue Code, had a major impact on last year's presidential 
election by raising and spending illegal soft money to run ads 
attacking both President Bush and Senator Kerry. The use of soft money 
to finance these activities is clearly illegal under current statute, 
and the fact that they have been allowed to continue unchecked is 
unconscionable.
  The blame for this lack of enforcement does not lie with the 
Congress, nor with the Administration. The blame for this continuing 
illegal activity lies squarely with the FEC. This agency has a duty to 
issue regulations to properly implement and enforce the Nation's 
campaign laws--and the FEC has failed, and it has failed miserably to 
carry out that responsibility. The Supreme Court found that to be the 
case in its McConnell decision, and Judge Kollar-Kotelly found that to 
be the case in her decision overturning 15 regulations incorrectly 
adopted by the FEC to implement the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 
2002, BCRA. That is why a Los Angeles Times editorial stated that, 
``her decision would make a fitting obituary for an agency that 
deserves to die.'' We are not going to allow the destructive FEC to 
continue to undermine the Nation's campaign finance laws as it has been 
consistently doing for the past two decades.
  Opponents of campaign reform like to point out that the activities of 
these 527s serve as proof that BCRA has failed in its stated purpose to 
eliminate the corrupting influence of soft money in our political 
campaigns. Let me be perfectly clear on this. The 527 issue has nothing 
to do with BCRA, it has everything to do with the 1974 law and the 
failure of the FEC to do its job and properly regulate the activities 
of these groups.
  As further evidence of the FEC's lack of capability, let me quote 
from a couple of court decisions which highlight this agency's 
shortcomings. First, in its decision upholding the constitutionality of 
BCRA in McConnell v. FEC, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that the FEC 
had ``subverted'' the law, issued regulations that ``permitted more 
than Congress had ever intended,'' and ``invited widespread 
circumvention'' of FECA's limits on contributions. Additionally, in 
September, a Federal district court judge threw out 15 of the FEC's 
regulations implementing BCRA. Among the reasons for her actions were 
that one provision ``severely undermines FECA'' and would ``foster 
corruption'', another ``runs completely afoul'' of current law, another 
would ``render the statute largely meaningless'' and, finally, that 
another had ``no rational basis.''
  The track record of the FEC is clear and, by their continued 
stonewalling, the Commission has proven itself to be nothing more than 
a bureaucratic nightmare, and the time has come to put an end to its 
destructive tactics. The FEC has had ample, and well documented, 
opportunities to address the issue of the 527's illegal activities, and 
each time they have taken a pass, choosing instead to delay, postpone, 
and refuse to act.
  Enough is enough. It is time to stop wasting taxpayer's dollars on an 
agency that runs roughshod over the will of the Congress, the Supreme 
Court, the American people, and the Constitution. We've fought too long 
and too hard to sit back and allow this worthless agency to undermine 
the law.
  So, here is the bottom line: If the FEC won't do its job, and its 
commissioners have proven time and time again that they won't, then 
we'll do it for them. The bill Senators Feingold, Lott and I introduce 
today will put an end to the abusive, illegal practices of these 527s.
  I urge my colleagues to support swift passage of this bill and put an 
end to this problem once and for all.

                          ____________________