[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 18978-19000]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. AKAKA:
  S. 1521. A bill to provide for teacher acculturation, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am introducing the Teacher Acculturation 
Act of 2005 as a means to address an issue that impedes effective 
learning in our Nation's classrooms, and that is cultural incongruence. 
Such a lack of congruence exists in a wide range of situations, from 
rural and underserved communities in remote areas to well-populated 
urban centers, from my State of Hawaii to areas on the Eastern 
seaboard. The dynamic I am describing exists along lines of race and 
ethnicity, socioeconomic strata, age, and many other vectors, which can 
muddy the stuff of learning that needs to be transmitted between 
students aiming to learn and teachers seeking to teach.
  As many of my colleagues and I have said many times, our children are 
our future. Furthermore, our great Nation is dependent on the success 
of our educational system and what it is delivering to our children. An 
essential part of our educational system is a highly qualified teacher 
with knowledge of the subject area, and the ability to teach that 
subject to students. This is the most important factor in the academic 
success of the student. My bill will address one attribute of that 
success: the ability of the teacher to present the lesson in a way that 
students are ready to learn it.
  I started my professional life as a teacher, so improvement of the 
field of education is never far from my thoughts. Even after all of my 
teacher training, I remember walking into a classroom and thinking, 
``What do I do now?'' and, ``Will I be able to connect with my 
students?'' I have never forgotten those thoughts. Through my bill, I 
hope to work to help teachers answer these and similar questions, 
particularly for those teachers who are placed in States that are new 
to them, or in parts of their home States with which they have little 
or no familiarity. In my State of Hawaii, according to an article 
published Monday in the Honolulu Advertiser, Hawaii's 258 public 
schools need 1,400 to 1,600 new teachers every year to replace those 
who retire or leave the system, particularly in the areas of special 
education, speech pathology, autism, and hearing impairment. However, 
only about 500 Hawaii teachers are graduating and earning their 
licenses every year from both public and private colleges, and many of 
them are being drawn away from the State to schools on the mainland. 
Recruiting trips by the Hawaii Department of Education are seeking 
hires in cities such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San 
Francisco. I would like to help to ensure the success of these and 
other teachers in similar situations across the country, to help smooth 
their adjustment to their new homes, and thus, make a fluid transition 
to their new classrooms.

[[Page 18979]]

  The Teacher Acculturation Act seeks to address cultural incongruence 
between the teacher and the student population in the classroom. To be 
successful, the teacher must be prepared to teach in a way that 
students are ready to learn. And with a increasingly diverse student 
population, that becomes harder and harder as time goes by. To achieve 
these ends, the bill proposes programs in three parts.
  The first two parts recognize the success of ongoing and sustained 
professional development to affect positive change in teaching 
pedagogy. The bill authorizes demonstration programs that aim to assist 
teachers in learning, developing, and implementing pedagogies that help 
all students learn. I have modeled the programs on the Lesson Study 
theory of change, which is a model that uses a cohort of professionals 
for lesson development, presentation of the developed lesson by a 
member of the cohort to a class, observation of the presentation by 
other members of the cohort, and post-presentation analysis and 
reflection by the entire cohort, along with coaches, mentors, and 
supervising practitioners. A group of teachers working together to 
improve their pedagogy has been shown to be very effective, and this 
model is becoming more popular at every level in teacher education and 
professional development, from classroom work in colleges of education, 
to cohort work by candidates for National Board Certification--the 
highest performance achievement available to a teacher in the United 
States.
  The first demonstration program would take place during the time the 
prospective teacher is in a college or school of education, and 
introduces a multicultural awareness component into the pre-service 
teaching activities. In this program, prospective teachers would work 
with members of the community, trained academics, and practicing 
teachers to learn about cultural characteristics of the student 
population, to develop pedagogies and curriculum to fit those cultures, 
and to study how to deliver the new lessons in a culturally relevant 
style. Prospective teachers would then deliver these lessons to the 
students in a real classroom setting while student teaching. Post-
teaching analysis, reflection, and discussion would then allow the 
student teacher to analyze and reflect upon the performance.
  The second demonstration program is structured similarly to the first 
program, but conducts a professional development activity during the 
time the teacher is new to the profession--generally the first three 
years--recognizing that many teachers develop teaching styles in these 
initial years that they may use for the duration of their teaching 
careers. Through this program, a cohort of teachers would undertake a 
year-long program, which includes two summers, under the direction of a 
coach trained in multicultural education. Participating teachers would 
already be placed in teaching positions and have a defined learning 
community to work with. If done right, such a program has the potential 
to involve the whole school community and, eventually, contribute to 
whole school change.
  These two programs taken together have the potential to develop a 
cadre of teachers adept at teaching in ways that are culturally-
relevant, ways that address the needs of the students, and ways in 
which the students are ready to learn. I truly feel that such programs 
working with new and prospective teachers can make a difference in 
addressing the current achievement gap, particularly impacting the 
groups most at risk of being on the losing end of the achievement gap.
  The third section of the Teacher Acculturation Act of 2005 would set 
up Centers of Excellence in Multicultural Education. These centers 
would support the professional development activities from the first 
two parts of the bill by providing trained mentors, coaches, and 
academics, as well as undertaking research into the areas of 
multicultural education. The centers would also develop activities for 
use by schools and districts to provide ongoing professional 
development opportunities to all faculty or teachers.
  We must never forget that a solid education is the cornerstone of our 
future. And a highly qualified teacher is needed to provide that 
education. The teacher not only needs to be knowledgeable about the 
subject being taught, but needs to know how to teach the subject to the 
students. This bill would help address the question of how. It seeks to 
prepare the teacher to deal with groups of students with different 
learning styles, as well as to identify the needs of divergent groups 
of students and how to vary teaching to support the learning of these 
students. My bill seeks to improve learning among those groups who are 
underserved today. Although my bill alone would not eliminate the 
achievement gap, it seeks to provide a good start.
  This bill is supported by leading experts and organizations in the 
field of multicultural education, including Ms. Joyce Harris, Executive 
director of the National Academy for Multicultural Education, Dr. James 
Banks of the Center for Multicultural Education at the University of 
Washington, and Dr. Randy Hitz, Dean of the College of Education at the 
University of Hawaii. I ask unanimous consent that their letters of 
support be printed in the Record. I ask unanimous consent that the text 
of the bill be printed in the Record.
  I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this important piece of 
legislation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                          National Association for


                                      Multicultural Education,

                                    Washington, DC, June 28, 2005.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: It is my understanding that you will 
     soon present legislation dealing with teacher acculturation. 
     On behalf of the National Association for Multicultural 
     Education (NAME), I am extending our support for you and the 
     legislation. What you are proposing is not only admirable but 
     very necessary. Today's school populations are more diverse 
     than they've ever been, and this diversity will only 
     increase. Further, while the student body is becoming 
     ethnically and racially more diverse, the teaching force is 
     not.
       Some will argue that the 3 R's are all teachers need to 
     focus on, and students will be all right; but others of us 
     know that this is not the case for a growing number of 
     today's youth. What was fine decades ago will not necessarily 
     work in today's schools.
       NAME thanks you for your foresight and courage. I'm sure 
     that you know you may have a Herculean task before you, but 
     please keep the faith. This is so important to make sure that 
     ALL of our children succeed. With the No Child Left Behind 
     Act and the cuts in some educational programs (for example, 
     The Dropout Prevention Program--who is more than likely to 
     drop out? The lower SES students and students of color!), is 
     it especially important that we have people of your stature 
     working to ensure that all of our children receive an 
     equitable education.
       I have seen your website. I've read about your many 
     accomplishments on behalf of your Hawaiian constituency and 
     for the American people at large. Again, please know that 
     NAME stands behind you. Please contact me if there is 
     anything that the organization or I may do for you as you go 
     forward with. this legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Joyce E. Harris,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                               University of Hawai`i at Manoa,

                                       Honolulu, HI, June 23, 2005
     Sen. Daniel Akaka,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: I am writing to support the Teacher 
     Acculturation bill you are introducing in the Senate. I have 
     carefully reviewed the bill with faculty in the University of 
     Hawai`i, college of Education, and we think it has great 
     potential to improve education throughout the United States.
       The relationship between the teacher and the student is the 
     key to success in education. The Teacher Acculturation bill 
     seeks to improve student achievement by ameliorating the 
     cultural mismatch between teachers and the students they 
     teach, thus improving the teacher's ability to address 
     educational needs of individual students.
       The University of Hawai`i, College of Education is heavily 
     involved in indigenous education multicultural initiatives, 
     and other efforts to ensure that teachers are well prepared 
     to work with diverse populations of students. As one of the 
     nation's most diverse states, Hawai`i has significant 
     challenges in bridging cultural gaps between teachers and 
     students. But, nearly every school in every state in the 
     nation faces the challenge of

[[Page 18980]]

     bridging cultural differences between teachers and students. 
     Your bill will create models for better preparing teachers to 
     understand and address the learning needs of the diverse 
     student populations they serve, thus improving their academic 
     achievement.
       Thank you for your leadership in preparing this innovative 
     and important bill, and thank you for the opportunity to 
     comment on the bill.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Randy Hitz,
     Dean.
                                  ____


                                S. 1521

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

     SECTION 1. TEACHER ACCULTURATION.

       Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1021 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

                    ``PART C--TEACHER ACCULTURATION

     ``SEC. 231. SHORT TITLE.

       ``This part may be cited as the `Teacher Acculturation Act 
     of 2005'.

     ``SEC. 232. FINDINGS.

       ``Congress makes the following findings:
       ``(1) Every person (child, adolescent, or adult) has her or 
     his own cluster of learning modalities.
       ``(2) These individual learning modalities are the result 
     of many factors, including the person's cultural heritage, 
     language, and socioeconomic background.
       ``(3) Research has shown that learning occurs best within a 
     learning environment that closely matches a person's 
     individual learning modalities.
       ``(4) There is a strong correlation between--
       ``(A) the lack of academic achievement of a student; and
       ``(B) a lack of congruence between--
       ``(i) the learning modalities of the student; and
       ``(ii) the teaching pedagogy of the teacher.
       ``(5) One of the factors that significantly impacts 
     learning modalities is a student's culture.
       ``(6) A congruence between the cultural norms embedded in 
     the teaching environment and the culture of a student has 
     been shown to significantly improve the academic achievement 
     of the student.
       ``(7) The teacher has the most control in setting the 
     cultural environment of the classroom.

     ``SEC. 233. PURPOSE.

       ``It is the purpose of this part to develop a core group of 
     teachers who are able to provide instruction in a way that is 
     culturally congruent with the learning modalities of the 
     students they are teaching, in order to--
       ``(1) ameliorate the lack of cultural congruence between 
     teachers and the students they teach; and
       ``(2) improve student achievement.

     ``SEC. 234. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this part:
       ``(1) Induction phase.--The term `induction phase' means 
     the period when a teacher is new to the profession, the 
     classroom, or a school.
       ``(2) In-service phase.--The term `in-service phase' means 
     the period during and throughout the professional life of a 
     teacher.
       ``(3) Practicum phase.--The term `practicum phase' means 
     the period beginning with the last year of a teacher 
     preparation program at an institution of higher education 
     when the student is spending time in a prekindergarten 
     through grade 12 classroom, and culminating at the end of the 
     student teaching portion of the student's teacher preparation 
     program.
       ``(4) Supervising academic.--The term `supervising 
     academic' means a member of the faculty of an institution of 
     higher education who--
       ``(A) is designated to oversee, coordinate, and participate 
     in the field placement or student teaching experience of a 
     preservice teacher; and
       ``(B) works in conjunction with a supervising practitioner.
       ``(5) Supervising practitioner.--The term `supervising 
     practitioner' means a prekindergarten through grade 12 
     teacher in a school who--
       ``(A) is designated to coach, observe, and evaluate a 
     preservice teacher at the school during the preservice 
     teacher's field placement or student teaching experience in 
     the classroom; and
       ``(B) works in conjunction with the supervising academic.

     ``SEC. 235. MEASURE OF CULTURAL MISMATCH.

       ``The Secretary, in consultation with relevant educational 
     and cultural governmental and nongovernmental entities and 
     not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the 
     Teacher Acculturation Act of 2005, shall develop a measure of 
     cultural mismatch for purposes of--
       ``(1) the demonstration program under section 236; and
       ``(2) the composition of partnerships described in sections 
     242 and 263.

     ``SEC. 236. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to carry out 
     a demonstration program to investigate, develop, and test 
     methods to attempt to ameliorate the cultural mismatch 
     between teachers and the students they teach.
       ``(b) Components.--The demonstration program shall consist 
     of--
       ``(1) professional development activities occurring during 
     3 different phases of a teacher's professional life, 
     including the practicum phase, induction phase, and in-
     service phase; and
       ``(2) the development of centers of excellence in 
     multicultural education.

                 ``Subpart 1--Induction Phase Component

     ``SEC. 241. GRANTS AUTHORIZED.

       ``In carrying out the demonstration program under this 
     part, the Secretary is authorized to award grants to eligible 
     partnerships to enable the eligible partnerships to carry out 
     the induction phase component of the teacher preparation 
     assisted under this subpart.

     ``SEC. 242. ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIPS.

       ``In this subpart, the term `eligible partnership' means a 
     partnership consisting of--
       ``(1) a local educational agency, with a high percentage of 
     students who have a cultural mismatch with the majority of 
     the teaching staff at the schools served by the local 
     educational agency, collaborating with--
       ``(A) a cohort of induction phase teachers from the local 
     educational agency; and
       ``(B) members of a school community who are--
       ``(i) from the cultural background of the students to be 
     taught by the teachers assisted under the grant; and
       ``(ii) knowledgeable about the cultural norms of the 
     community; and
       ``(2) an institution of higher education or organization 
     with expertise in multicultural education, collaborating with 
     a mentor, coach, or facilitator who will work with the cohort 
     described in paragraph (1)(A).

     ``SEC. 243. INDUCTION PHASE COMPONENT.

       ``An eligible partnership that receives a grant under this 
     subpart shall use the grant funds to carry an induction phase 
     component of the demonstration program that may include the 
     following:
       ``(1) A summer workshop held during the summer prior to a 
     program year (as described in paragraph (2)), in which 
     participant teachers study the basics of the following:
       ``(A) Multicultural education.
       ``(B) The cultural norms of the students served by the 
     local educational agency where the participant teachers will 
     be teaching.
       ``(C) The history of the municipality and the cultural 
     groups where the participant teachers will be teaching.
       ``(2) A program year during the school year designed to 
     include--
       ``(A) a series of classroom-based teaching activities and 
     observations, including pre- and post-activity discussion 
     under the coaching of a person experienced in leading such a 
     program and trained in the principles of multicultural 
     education;
       ``(B) individual one-on-one mentoring by a mentor, coach, 
     or facilitator participating in the eligible partnership;
       ``(C) classroom visits including possible videotaping of 
     the lessons; and
       ``(D) group meetings to reflect on--
       ``(i) a classroom visit described in subparagraph (C); or
       ``(ii) the progress of the program.
       ``(3) A workshop or institute during the summer immediately 
     after a program year (as described in paragraph (2)) that may 
     include the following:
       ``(A) Analysis of lessons developed and taught during the 
     program year.
       ``(B) Practice lessons presented to the cohort described in 
     section 242(1)(A).
       ``(C) Analysis of participant teacher growth over the 
     duration of the program.
       ``(D) Development of a reflective portfolio, for each 
     member of the cohort described in section 242(1)(A), of the 
     member's experience in the program.

     ``SEC. 244. USE OF FUNDS.

       ``Grant funds provided under this subpart may be used for--
       ``(1) stipends and release time for participant teachers;
       ``(2) compensation for mentors, coaches, facilitators, or 
     substitutes;
       ``(3) reimbursement for normal expenses incurred by the 
     eligible partnership during the grant period; and
       ``(4) equipment, supplies, and travel necessary for the 
     program.

     ``SEC. 245. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary to carry out this subpart for fiscal year 2006 
     and each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

                 ``Subpart 2--Practicum Phase Component

     ``SEC. 251. GRANTS AUTHORIZED.

       ``In carrying out the demonstration program under this 
     part, the Secretary is authorized to award grants to eligible 
     partnerships to enable the eligible partnerships to carry out 
     the practicum phase component of the teacher preparation 
     assisted under this subpart.

     ``SEC. 252. ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIPS.

       ``In this subpart, the term `eligible partnership' means a 
     partnership consisting of--

[[Page 18981]]

       ``(1) a teacher preparation program approved by a State 
     educational agency and accredited by the National Council for 
     Accreditation of Teacher Education, collaborating with--
       ``(A) a cohort of practicum phase students; and
       ``(B) a faculty member who serves as a supervising 
     practitioner;
       ``(2) a local educational agency--
       ``(A) serving a student population whose cultural norms--
       ``(i) are different from the cultural norms of the 
     participating teacher preparation program students; and
       ``(ii) are similar to the cultural norms of the students or 
     community served by a local educational agency where the 
     participating teacher preparation program students will be 
     looking for employment; and
       ``(B) collaborating with a group of supervising 
     practitioners; and
       ``(3) a support committee for the practicum program, that 
     provides cultural norms to the practicum participants, which 
     may include--
       ``(A) a center of excellence described in subpart 3;
       ``(B) faculty or staff of a school, local educational 
     agency, or State educational agency;
       ``(C) parents or family members of a student taught by the 
     student teachers assisted under the grant;
       ``(D) community stakeholders; or
       ``(E) organizations with expertise in multicultural 
     education.

     ``SEC. 253. PRACTICUM PHASE COMPONENT.

       ``An eligible partnership that receives a grant under this 
     subpart shall use the grant funds to carry out a practicum 
     phase component of the demonstration program that may include 
     the following:
       ``(1) A course for the practicum students covering 
     multicultural education, including specifics pertaining to 
     the cultural norms of the students served by the local 
     educational agency where the students will be participating 
     in the practicum.
       ``(2) A program running contemporaneous to the practicum 
     that includes--
       ``(A) a program under the coaching of a supervising 
     academic where the practicum students interact with each 
     other to discuss their experiences;
       ``(B) individual one-on-one coaching by a supervising 
     academic;
       ``(C) classroom visits to the locations of other student 
     teachers in the cohort described in section 252(1)(A), 
     including possible videotaping of the lessons; and
       ``(D) periodic cohort meetings during the practicum to 
     reflect on the progress of the program.
       ``(3) A followup program at the conclusion of the practicum 
     carried out by the teacher preparation program participating 
     in the eligible partnership.

     ``SEC. 254. USE OF FUNDS.

       ``Grant funds provided under this subpart may be used for--
       ``(1) compensation for a supervising academic or a 
     supervising practitioner;
       ``(2) scholarships for participants; and
       ``(3) equipment, supplies, travel, and other expenses 
     appropriate to the program.

     ``SEC. 255. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary to carry out this subpart for fiscal year 2006 
     and each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

     ``Subpart 3--Centers of Excellence in Multicultural Education

     ``SEC. 261. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE AUTHORIZED.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to establish 
     not more than 10 centers to support excellence in 
     multicultural education.
       ``(b) Duties.--Such centers shall--
       ``(1) support participants during the practicum phases and 
     induction phases of their teacher preparation;
       ``(2) develop and implement an in-service phase program;
       ``(3) develop or expand the theory and practice of 
     multicultural education; and
       ``(4) collect appropriate data to allow for the evaluation 
     of the activities implemented under this part.

     ``SEC. 262. LOCATION OF CENTERS.

       ``The centers shall--
       ``(1) be located within universities, colleges or schools 
     with teacher education programs approved by the appropriate 
     State educational agency and accredited by the National 
     Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education;
       ``(2) be located in geographically diverse areas of the 
     United States; and
       ``(3) be distributed among institutions of higher education 
     serving various cultural communities.

     ``SEC. 263. PARTNERSHIPS.

       ``The centers may form partnerships, for the purpose of 
     carrying out the duties described in section 261(b), with--
       ``(1) a college or school of teacher education;
       ``(2) at least 1 local educational agency with a high 
     degree of cultural mismatch between the local educational 
     agency's teachers and the students they teach;
       ``(3) an academic department, center, or program that 
     focuses on the study of cultural mismatches, such as cultural 
     mismatches related to gender, race, national origin, or other 
     similar areas; or
       ``(4) such additional entities as the centers determine 
     appropriate.

     ``SEC. 264. USE OF FUNDS.

       ``Funds made available under this subpart may be used for 
     the following:
       ``(1) Financial support for researchers, such as doctoral 
     and post-doctoral fellowships.
       ``(2) In-service multicultural education workshops for 
     teachers.
       ``(3) Supporting the programs assisted under subpart 1 or 
     2.
       ``(4) Supporting research into best practices in 
     multicultural education, performing evaluation of the best 
     practices, and carrying out a dissemination program for the 
     best practices that improve student academic achievement.
       ``(5) Evaluation of--
       ``(A) the activities of the centers; and
       ``(B) the impact of the activities of the centers on 
     teaching practices and student achievement.

     ``SEC. 265. ANNUAL MEETING OF THE CENTERS.

       ``The Secretary is authorized to convene an annual meeting 
     of all centers assisted under this subpart for the purpose of 
     enabling the centers to share information, research, and best 
     practices.

     ``SEC. 266. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may 
     be necessary to carry out this subpart for fiscal year 2006 
     and each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

                    ``Subpart 4--General Provisions

     ``SEC. 271. ANNUAL REPORTS.

       (a) Report.--Each eligible partnership that receives a 
     grant, and each center that receives assistance, under this 
     part shall prepare and submit to the Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and the 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of 
     Representatives, a report on the activities of the eligible 
     partnership or center, respectively, that are supported under 
     this part.
       (b) Date.--The report described in subsection (a) shall be 
     submitted 2 years after the date of enactment of the Teacher 
     Acculturation Act of 2005, and annually thereafter for the 
     duration of the grant or assistance, as the case may be.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CHAMBLISS (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Burr, and Ms. 
        Murkowski):
  S. 1522. A bill to recognize the heritage of hunting and provide 
opportunities for continued hunting on Federal public land; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, today I introduce the Hunting Heritage 
Protection Act of 2005. With the introduction of this important 
legislation, we are able to acknowledge our Nation's rich heritage of 
hunting. The purpose of this bill is to pass that legacy on to future 
generations by protecting and preserving the rights of our Nation's 
sportsmen and women.
  In 2001, over 13 million Americans contributed over $20.6 billion to 
the U.S. economy while hunting--a true recreational activity. Many 
believe that in order to hunt you must own land, but that is not true. 
I believe that hunting should be available as a recreational activity 
for everyone.
  I have been an avid outdoor sportsman since my adulthood. I am also 
an avid conservationist, like most other hunters. Recreational hunting 
provides many opportunities to spend valuable time with children, just 
as I do with my son. He has been hunting since he was a young boy where 
he discovered and learned to appreciate one of the Earth's greatest 
treasures, nature.
  Over the years, hunters have contributed billions of dollars to 
wildlife conservation, by purchasing licenses, permits, and stamps, as 
well as paying excise taxes on goods used by hunters. Since the time of 
President Teddy Roosevelt, father of the conservation movement, 
sportsmen and women have been and will continue to be some of the 
greatest supporters of sound wildlife management and conservation 
practices in the U.S.
  Hunters need to be recognized for the vital role they play in 
conservation in this country. The Hunting Heritage Protection Act will 
do just that. This bill formalizes a policy by which the Federal 
Government will support, promote, and enhance recreational hunting 
opportunities, as permitted under State and Federal law. Further, the 
bill mandates that Federal public land and water are to be open to 
access and use for recreational hunting where and when appropriate. I 
should clarify and stress that this bill does not suggest

[[Page 18982]]

that we open all national parks to hunting. As I mentioned, the goal is 
simple--I want recreational hunting on our public land to be available 
to the citizens of this country where and when appropriate.
  It is crucial that the tradition of hunting is protected and that the 
valuable contributions that hunters have made to conservation in this 
country are recognized. And, we want to ensure that Federal land 
management decisions and their actions result in a ``no net loss of 
hunting opportunities'' on our public lands. This bill allows Congress 
to address this issue and to honor our Nation's sportsmen and women.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 1523. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make 
permanent increased expensing for small businesses; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation on 
behalf of the Nation's millions of small businesses and self-employed 
individuals. I am pleased to join with my colleague in the House, 
Congressman Wally Herger, in reforming the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 to permanently extend the amount of new investment a business can 
expense.
  This bill is a critical incentive for the small business sector of 
our economy to invest in new technology, expand their operations, and 
most important, create jobs.
  We can never minimize the role that small businesses play in our 
economy. They represent 99 percent of all employers, employ 51 percent 
of the private-sector workforce, provide nearly 75 percent of the net 
new jobs, contribute 51 percent of the private-sector output, and 
represent 96 percent of all exporters of goods. In short, size is the 
only ``small'' aspect of small business.
  The bill I introduce today recognizes the vitality and uniquely 
American innovation of the small business owners and entrepreneurs 
throughout our country. It will make permanent the provisions in 
Section 179 of the Internal Revenue Code, which enables small 
businesses to write off the cost of new equipment, rather than 
depreciate it over a period of years.
  As the chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship, I am responding today to the repeated requests from 
small businesses in my State of Maine and from across the Nation for 
greater expensing of new equipment.
  By making permanent the current expensing limit of $100,000 and 
indexing these amounts for inflation, this bill will achieve two 
important objectives.
  First, qualifying businesses will be able to write off more equipment 
purchases today, instead of waiting 5, 6, 7 or more years to recover 
their costs through depreciation.
  That represents substantial savings both in dollars and in the time 
small businesses would otherwise be forced to spend complying with 
complex depreciation rules. Moreover, new equipment contributes to 
continued productivity growth in the business community, which Federal 
Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has repeatedly stressed is essential to 
long-term economic growth and job creation.
  Second, more businesses will qualify for this benefit because the 
phase-out limit will be made permanent at $400,000 in new equipment 
purchases. This will occur at the same time small business capital 
investment pumps more money into the many sectors of the economy. My 
bill is a win-win for small business and the economy as a whole.
  Small businesses are always at the forefront of our national economic 
recoveries and our national economic booms. This bill strengthens their 
ability to lead the way. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting 
this important legislation as we work with the President to enact this 
bill 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. 1523

       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 ``Small Business Expensing 
     Permanency Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. INCREASED EXPENSING FOR SMALL BUSINESS MADE 
                   PERMANENT.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 179(b) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to dollar limitation) 
     is amended by striking ``$25,000 ($100,000 in the case of 
     taxable years beginning after 2002 and before 2008)'' and 
     inserting ``$100,000''.
       (b) Increase in Qualifying Investment at Which Phaseout 
     Begins.--Paragraph (2) of section 179(b) of such Code 
     (relating to reduction in limitation) is amended by striking 
     ``$200,000 ($400,000 in the case of taxable years beginning 
     after 2002 and before 2008)'' and inserting ``$400,000''.
       (c) Inflation Adjustments.--Section 179(b)(5)(A) of such 
     Code (relating to inflation adjustments) is amended by 
     striking ``and before 2008''.
       (d) Revocation of Election.--Section 179(c)(2) of such Code 
     (relating to election irrevocable) is amended by striking 
     ``and before 2008''.
       (e) Off-the-shelf Computer Software.--Section 
     179(d)(1)(A)(ii) of such Code (relating to section 179 
     property) is amended by striking ``and before 2008''.
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Durbin, Mr. 
        Rockefeller, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Corzine, Mr. 
        Salazar, Mr. Obama, and Ms. Mikulski):
  S. 1525. A bill to ensure that commercial insurers cannot engage in 
price fixing, bid rigging, or market allocations to the detriment of 
competition and consumers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the ``Medical 
Malpractice Insurance Antitrust Act of 2005.'' In the ongoing debate 
about health care costs, this legislation is a targeted and responsible 
move toward fixing one significant part of the system that is broken 
the skyrocketing insurance premiums for medical malpractice.
  For too long, doctors and hospitals have endured dramatic increases 
in the cost of their malpractice insurance. I doubt there is a single 
Senator who has not heard repeatedly from beleaguered physicians back 
home. Rising insurance rates are reportedly forcing some doctors to 
abandon their practices.
  Some of my colleagues in the other body seem content to echo the 
refrains of the insurance industry and heap blame for the problem of 
rising insurance premiums rates on trial lawyers and the victims of 
medical malpractice themselves. I have opposed arbitrary caps on 
damages because they will inflict additional harm on the most 
vulnerable victims of medical malpractice.
  Many of us have questioned the insurance industry's claim that 
lawsuits are causing the rise in premium costs since doctors in States 
that have imposed damages caps have not seen a reduction in their 
medical malpractice insurance premiums.
  A newly released report provides shows that our questions were well-
founded. This report provides real evidence rather than anecdotal 
stories routinely trotted out by the insurance industry advocates. This 
study was prepared by a former State Insurance Commissioner and uses 
the insurance industry's own numbers to debunk the myths being advanced 
by the insurance industry.
  The study entitled, ``Falling Claims and Rising Premiums in the 
Medical Malpractice Insurance Industry,'' suggests that malpractice 
insurers have been overcharging, even gouging, physicians 
unconscionably. I expect a number of Senators will be surprised to 
learn that the malpractice claims payments actually went down, in real 
terms, over the past five years. In addition, even the insurers' own 
projections of future losses are declining. Despite these downward 
trends, year in and year out, these insurers are burdening doctors with 
increased premium costs and shifting the blame for their increases on 
to lawyers and victims.
  In the past five years, premiums have more than doubled even though 
claims payments have been stable. In 2004, malpractice insurers' total 
premiums were three times higher than their payouts. During the years 
2000 to 2004, net

[[Page 18983]]

premiums increased by 120 percent, while net claims payments increased 
by less than 6 percent.
  I urge Senators to read this report. It is based entirely on data 
from annual statements filed under oath with State insurance 
departments by the Nation's 15 largest malpractice insurers. The 
statements contain each insurer's estimate of how much it will pay out 
in malpractice claims, as well as data showing how much it actually 
paid out in claims and took in premiums. Claims and projected losses 
are down. It is only premiums that are rising, not claims.
  What this boils down to is an insurance industry problem, not a 
problem with the legal system. No wonder that the State attorneys 
general of Connecticut and Missouri have reacted to the study by 
attacking industry practices and calling for an aggressive regulatory 
response.
  As this study makes clear, high malpractice insurance premiums are 
not the result of malpractice lawsuit verdicts. They are the result of 
investment decisions by the insurance companies and of business models 
geared toward ever-increasing profits. I hope that this study once and 
for all shines light on the real culprit in rising malpractice 
insurance rates and informs the Senate with solid evidence of the best 
way to assist the good doctors who commit their professional lives to 
caring for others. I ask unanimous consent that the executive summary 
of the study be printed in the Record.
  To be sure, different States have different experiences with medical 
malpractice insurance, and insurance remains a largely State-regulated 
industry. Each State should endeavor to develop its own solution to 
rising medical malpractice rates because each state has its own unique 
problems. Some States--such as my own, Vermont--while experiencing 
problems, do not face as great a crisis as others.
  But another fact of the insurance industry's business model requires 
a Federal legislative correction its blanket exemption from federal 
anti-trust laws. Insurers have for years enjoyed a special benefit in 
our marketplace. The McCarran-Ferguson Act permits insurance companies 
to operate without being subject to most of the Federal antitrust laws, 
and our Nation's physicians and their patients are suffering from this 
special treatment. Using their exemption, insurers can collude to set 
rates, resulting in higher premiums than true competition would achieve 
and because of this exemption, enforcement officials cannot investigate 
any such collusion. If Congress is serious about controlling rising 
premiums, we must revoke this blanket exemption created in the 
McCarran-Ferguson Act.
  That is why today I introduce the ``Medical Malpractice Insurance 
Antitrust Act of 2005.'' I want to thank Senators Kennedy, Boxer, 
Corzine, Durbin, Feingold, Mikulski, Obama, Rockefeller, and Salazar 
for cosponsoring this essential legislation. Our bill modifies the 
McCarran-Ferguson Act for the most pernicious anti-trust offenses: 
price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocations. I am hard-pressed to 
imagine that anyone could object to a prohibition on insurance 
carriers' fixing prices or dividing territories for anticompetitive 
purposes. After all, the rest of our Nation's industries manage either 
to abide by these laws or pay the consequences.
  Many State insurance commissioners police the industry well within 
the power they are accorded in their own laws, and some States have 
antitrust laws of their own that could cover some anticompetitive 
activities in the insurance industry. Our legislation would not affect 
regulation of insurance by State insurance commissioners and other 
State regulators. There is no reason to continue a system in which the 
Federal enforcers are precluded from prosecuting the most harmful 
antitrust violations just because they are committed by insurance 
companies.
  This legislation is a carefully tailored solution to one critical 
aspect of the problem of excessive medical malpractice insurance 
premiums. I hope that quick action by the Judiciary Committee and then 
by the full Senate, will ensure that this real solution is adopted 
before more damage is done to the physicians of this country and to the 
patients that they serve.
  Only professional baseball has enjoyed an anti-trust exemption 
comparable to that created for the insurance industry by the McCarran-
Ferguson Act. Senator Hatch and I have joined forces several times in 
recent years to scale back that exemption for baseball, and in the Curt 
Flood Act of 1998 we successfully eliminated the exemption as it 
applied to employment relations. I hope we can work together again to 
create more competition in the insurance industry, just as we did with 
baseball.
  If Congress is serious about helping to control rising medical 
malpractice insurance premiums, then we must limit the insurance 
industry's broad exemption to Federal antitrust law and promote real 
competition in the insurance marketplace.
  There being no objection, the executive summary was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

Falling Claims and Rising Premiums in the Medical Malpractice Insurance 
                                Industry

                            (By Jay Angoff)


                           Executive Summary

       This Report analyzes the 2000-2004 performance of each of 
     the 15 largest medical malpractice insurers in the United 
     States rated by A.M. Best, the principal rating service for 
     the insurance industry. The Report is based primarily on data 
     from the carriers' 2004 Annual Statements filed with state 
     insurance departments.
       The Report finds the following:
       Over the last five years the amount the major medical 
     malpractice insurers have collected in premiums has more than 
     doubled, while their claims payouts have remained essentially 
     flat.
       Some malpractice insurers substantially increased their 
     premiums while both their claims payments and their projected 
     future claims payments were decreasing.
       Malpractice insurers accumulated record amounts of surplus 
     over the last three years.
       Taken together, the malpractice carriers analyzed increased 
     their net premiums by 120.2% during the period 2000-2004, 
     although their net claims payments rose by only 5.7%. Thus, 
     they increased their premiums by 21 times (120.2/5.7 = 21.09) 
     the increase in their claims payments.
       As a result of these two dramatically different trends, the 
     ratio between these insurers' claims payments and premiums 
     fell by more than half between 2000 and 2004: it declined 
     from 69.9% to 33.6% on a net basis, and from 68.8% to 32.1% 
     on a gross basis. Put another way, in 2004 the leading 
     medical malpractice insurers took in approximately three 
     times as much in premiums as they paid out in claims.
       Moreover, several insurers substantially increased their 
     premiums even though their claims payments actually fell--and 
     fell substantially. For example:
       Healthcare Indemnity, Inc. (HCI), an affiliate of HCA 
     corporation, increased its premiums by $173 million, or 88%, 
     while its claims payments fell by $74 million, or 32%. As a 
     result, in 2004 it paid out only 43 cents in claims for each 
     premium dollar it collected.
       ProNational, an affiliate of ProAssurance Corporation, 
     increased its premiums by $87 million, or 79%, while its 
     claims payments fell by $43 million, or 63%. As a result, in 
     2004 it paid out only 13 cents in claims for each premium 
     dollar it collected.
       Medical Assurance, another ProAssurance affiliate, 
     increased its premiums by $151 million, or 89%, while its 
     claims payments fell by a third. As a result, in 2004 it paid 
     out only 10 cents in claims for each premium dollar it 
     collected.
       In addition, Lexington Insurance Company, an affiliate of 
     AIG, reported that its net written premiums increased from 
     $21.1 million in 2000 to 483.0 million in 2004--an increase 
     of $461.9 million, or 2200%--while its net paid losses 
     increased by only $52.9 million. As a result, in 2004 it paid 
     out only 14 cents in claims for each premium dollar it 
     collected.
       Finally, even the ratio between the amount the leading 
     malpractice insurers estimated they would pay out in the 
     future and the premiums they earn--what insurers somewhat 
     counter-intuitively call their ``incurred loss'' ratio--
     declined by almost 25% between 2000 and 2004. Due to this 
     decline--which is in addition to the decline in the amounts 
     these insurers have actually been paying out--they estimated 
     in 2004 that they would ultimately pay out in claims only 
     51.4 cents of each premium dollar they earned. Perhaps most 
     striking, in 2004 these 15 insurers taken together increased 
     their earned premium by 9.3%, even though their incurred 
     losses--the amount they estimated they would pay out in the 
     future--declined by 21.1%.
       Because of the overall surge in malpractice premiums with 
     no corresponding surge in

[[Page 18984]]

     claims payments during the last five years, the leading 
     malpractice insurers have increased their surplus by more 
     than a third in only three years, and they are now charging 
     more for malpractice insurance than * * *
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 1526. A bill to provide education to students in grades 7 through 
12 about the importance of higher education; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to 
introduce the Roads to Success Act of 2005, which is legislation 
designed to expand higher educational and career opportunities for 
American students. There is no doubt as to the benefit of receiving a 
post-secondary education. The level of education that individuals 
accumulate has an important influence on their experience in the labor 
market. According to 2002 U.S. Census Bureau statistics on educational 
attainment and earnings, the mean earnings of men with a bachelor's 
degree is $63,354, while the mean earnings of men with a high school 
degree is $32,363. This is a difference of more than $30,000 or 97 
percent.
  In recent years, there have been clear signs that more Americans are 
pursuing higher education opportunities. In June 2002, USA Today 
reported that 63 percent of high school graduates go to college 
immediately after graduation, the highest percentage in U.S. history. 
Yet not all of the news on college graduation rates has been good. Only 
18 percent of African Americans and 11 percent of Hispanic high school 
graduates earn a bachelor's degree by their late twenties, compared to 
33 percent of whites according to the National Center for Education 
Statistics, NCES, in 2001. Further, in 2000, NCES reported that 22 
percent of low-income, college qualified high school graduates do not 
pursue post-secondary education, compared to 4 percent of high-income 
graduates.
  As I travel through Pennsylvania, I still hear from too many middle 
school and high school students that they do not have the preparation 
necessary to enroll in higher education institutions. On a trip to the 
Commonwealth, I joined Andrew McKelvey--the founder of the McKelvey 
Foundation--to announce Federal funding for entrepreneurial 
scholarships to rural, low-income Pennsylvania high school graduates. 
During that trip, I had a frank discussion with Mr. McKelvey regarding 
the need to not only ensure access to funding for students to pursue 
higher education, but the need to inform students about the importance 
of higher education, as well as prepare students for the application 
process.
  The bill I am introducing today, the ``Roads to Success Act of 
2005'', will help to educate middle school and high school students in 
grades 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, about higher education and career 
opportunities. This bill will create a program which will provide 
students with access to information on higher education and career 
development, and prepare students with the skills necessary to plan for 
higher education. The availability of information on higher education 
opportunities makes an enormous difference to students contemplating 
continuing their education at the undergraduate level.
  My legislation will authorize a grant to Roads to Success, a 
nonprofit educational organization, to develop a core curriculum to be 
taught in the classroom to equip middle and high school students with 
the appropriate skills and knowledge to pursue post-secondary education 
and their career goals. Given the importance of higher education, it 
makes sense to prepare students for the undergraduate process as part 
of their class instruction to ensure that all students have access to 
the necessary information to attain their objectives. To this end, 
middle schools and high schools participating in the program will 
dedicate one hour each week of their classroom activity to higher 
education and career preparation of students utilizing the core 
curriculum.
  Additionally, I seek to create a network of intensive academic 
support for students by encouraging public-private partnerships to 
emphasize the importance of higher education and career development. 
Partnerships with private entities create a unique opportunity for 
middle schools and high schools to supplement and enhance the core 
curriculum by offering appropriate enrichments, including guest 
speakers, videos and web-based services. For example, through these 
partnerships, middle school and high school students will gain first-
hand knowledge of the skills that businesses are seeking by having the 
opportunity to speak with business leaders, as well as perhaps tour 
local facilities. This will underscore the significance and importance 
of higher education for students as they embark on their future career 
paths.
  To implement this initiative, my bill will authorize $10 million 
annually for fiscal years 2006 through 2011, for Roads to Success to 
develop a core curriculum which has as its cornerstone increasing 
awareness of the importance of higher education, developing career 
awareness, building life skills, and providing education planning to 
students. Under this legislation, Roads to Success will award subgrants 
to five State educational agencies to offer higher education 
preparation programs using the core curriculum in middle and high 
schools with historically low rates of student application and 
admission to post-secondary institutions.
  It is my sincere hope that this act will ensure that students who 
wish to enroll in a higher education institution will have access to 
the tools and resources necessary to help them plan for undergraduate 
study. We must take this step to encourage students to pursue their 
educational and career goals--especially those who might not otherwise 
have this opportunity. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring 
this act, and urge its swift adoption.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself and Mr. Reed):
  S. 527. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to 
immunizations against vaccine-preventable diseases, including 
influenza, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today, Senator Reed and I are introducing 
the ``Vaccine Administration and Supply Act.'' Congressman Waxman is 
introducing a companion bill in the House. Our goal is to improve 
vaccine accessibility and administration across the country, by 
guaranteeing that every American has access to recommended vaccines, 
and strengthening our public health infrastructure.
  Vaccines are one of the Nation's most significant success stories in 
public health. They have wiped out mass killers such as polio and 
smallpox, and protected millions of Americans from other life-
threatening or debilitating infectious diseases. They save lives, and 
save costs too, in needless treatment and hospitalization for illnesses 
that could have been prevented.
  Today, the threat of infectious disease is ever present. Deadly 
strains of naturally occurring viruses, such as avian flu, are moving 
from animals to humans. The possibility of bioterrorism is looming. 
Accessibility to vaccines and improving our public health 
infrastructure are essential to protect the health of our communities 
and our Nation--and efforts to do so are long overdue.
  We have made remarkable progress in protecting children from vaccine-
preventable diseases by making vaccines available to uninsured and 
underinsured children at no cost through the Vaccines for Children and 
Immunization Grant programs. As a result, childhood immunization rates 
and disease reductions are near all-time highs.
  On the other hand, there is a huge gap in adult and adolescent 
vaccination. Each year, 46,000 to 48,000 adults die from diseases that 
could be cheaply and effectively prevented by vaccination. Many of 
these persons miss the opportunity to protect themselves against 
vaccine-preventable diseases because they don't have adequate insurance 
coverage.
  Our legislation will close this gap in public health by mandating 
that the Secretary of HHS establish an immunization program for adults. 
Uninsured

[[Page 18985]]

and underinsured adolescents and adults will be vaccinated at no charge 
in any Federally qualified health center, or local or State public 
health department.
  Participating States will also receive increased funding for the 
Immunization Grant Program, so that Program Managers can administer 
vaccinations to uninsured and underinsured citizens, as well as conduct 
education and awareness campaigns on the importance of vaccination and 
carry out strategies to increase vaccination rates throughout the 
States.
  In addition to increasing vaccine accessibility through State 
programs, this bill will also improve the national immunization 
infrastructure. Last year's shortage of influenza vaccine was a wake up 
call for greater national coordination of vaccine allocation and 
delivery. Our bill requires the Secretary of HHS to purchase and 
stockpile needed vaccines, and develop an emergency response plan, 
within one-year of enactment, to guide States in administering vaccines 
in the case of a shortage or emergency.
  As our Health Subcommittee on Bioterrorism and Public Health 
Preparedness continues to discuss provisions to encourage the 
development of vaccines and other countermeasures to bioterrorism, this 
legislation will establish the infrastructure needed to ensure the 
efficient administration of such countermeasures in a time of crisis.
  The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials said it 
well when stating, ``Immunization is a vital public health tool and an 
essential element in protecting the nation's health.'' In light of the 
obvious dangers, it is urgent for Congress to increase immunization 
rates and ensure the efficient allocation of vaccines in an emergency. 
I commend Congressman Waxman for his leadership on this important 
health issue in the House, and Senator Reed and I urge our colleagues 
in the Senate to join in this important effort to improve our public 
health preparedness.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Bun-
        ning):
  S. 1528. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
for the tax treatment of horses, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Equine 
Equity Act of 2005 with my colleague from Arkansas, Mrs. Lincoln, and 
my colleague from Kentucky, Mr. Bunning.
  Each spring on the first Saturday of May, the sporting world turns 
its attention to my hometown of Louisville for the annual running of 
the Kentucky Derby. It has been appropriately called ``the most 
exciting two minutes in sports,'' and has given us such great champions 
as Secretariat, Seattle Slew, and Smarty Jones.
  The activities surrounding the Derby also allow Kentucky to show off 
one of its signature industries, the horse industry. Long after the 
pageantry and festivities of Derby day, the horse industry remains a 
vital part of Kentucky's economy and cultural heritage. Horses are 
Kentucky's largest agricultural product. The horse industry contributes 
$3.5 billion to Kentucky's economy, and directly employs more than 
50,000 Kentuckians.
  While many Americans appropriately identify the horse industry as one 
of Kentucky's signature industries, the industry's economic impact 
extends well beyond the borders of the Commonwealth. A recent economic 
impact study by the firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu found that the 
horse industry contributes approximately $39 billion in direct economic 
impacts to the U.S. economy each year. The industry sustains 1.4 
million full-time equivalent jobs each year, with over 460,000 of those 
jobs created from direct spending within the industry.
  Nearly 2 million Americans own horses, either for racing, showing, or 
recreational purposes. While the popular image of horse owners might 
focus on Millionaire's Row at Churchill Downs on Derby Day, the facts 
tell a different story. Only about one-quarter, 28 percent, of U.S. 
horse owners have incomes greater than $100,000. More than one in every 
three, 34 percent, horse owners has an income of less than $50,000.
  Like many businesses, outside investments are essential to the 
operation and growth of the horse industry. Without investors willing 
to buy and breed horses, it is impossible for the industry to thrive. 
Unfortunately, there are several unfair, unwise provisions in Federal 
law that discourage investment in the horse industry.
  In an effort to address these concerns, today I introduce the Equine 
Equity Act with my colleague from Arkansas, Mrs. Lincoln, and my good 
friend from Kentucky, Mr. Bunning. The Equine Equity Act includes three 
key provisions.
  First, it will provide capital gains treatment for horses that is 
equal to other investments. Nearly all capital assets are eligible to 
receive more favorable capital gains tax treatment once they are held 
for 12 months. However, horses and cattle must be held for 2 years to 
receive capital gains treatment. This legislation would reduce the 
capital gains holding period for horses from 24 months to 12 months.
  Second, it will apply equal depreciation standards for all 
racehorses. Current law states that racehorses that begin training when 
older than 24 months of age are depreciated over 3 years, while those 
horses that begin training before reaching 24 months of age are 
depreciated over 7 years.
  Most horses begin training before they reach 24 months, but their 
racing careers do not last 7 years. This legislation would reduce the 
depreciation period for racehorses to 3 years to more accurately 
reflect the racing life of horses.
  Finally, the Equine Equity Act would establish equity in eligibility 
for disaster assistance between horses and other livestock. Most 
livestock, beef, dairy, sheep, and goats, are eligible for Federal 
disaster assistance during a drought, but horses are not. This 
legislation would make horses eligible for disaster-assistance programs 
offered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
  I appreciate the willingness of my colleagues from Arkansas and 
Kentucky to join me in introducing this legislation of tremendous 
importance to our States. I look forward to working with them and our 
colleagues in the Senate to enact this bipartisan bill into law.
  Mr. McCONNELL. 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. 1528

       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 ``Equine Equity Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. 3-YEAR DEPRECIATION FOR ALL RACE HORSES.

       (a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 168(e)(3)(A) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining 3-year property) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(i) any race horse,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 3. REDUCTION OF HOLDING PERIOD TO 12 MONTHS FOR PURPOSES 
                   OF DETERMINING WHETHER HORSES ARE SECTION 1231 
                   ASSETS.

       (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 1231(b)(3) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definition of 
     property used in the trade or business) is amended by 
     striking ``and horses''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2005.

     SEC. 4. LIVESTOCK ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--In carrying out a livestock assistance, 
     compensation, or feed program, the Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall include horses within the definition of ``livestock'' 
     covered by the program.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 602(2) of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 
     U.S.C. 1471(2)) is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``horses,'' after ``bison,''; and
       (B) by striking ``equine animals used for food or in the 
     production of food,''.
       (2) Section 806 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food 
     and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-387; 114 Stat. 1549A-51) is amended 
     by inserting ``(including losses to elk, reindeer, bison, and 
     horses)'' after ``livestock losses''.

[[Page 18986]]

       (3) Section 10104(a) of the Farm Security and Rural 
     Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 1472(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``and bison'' and inserting ``bison, and horses''.
       (4) Section 203(d)(2) of the Agricultural Assistance Act of 
     2003 (Public Law 108-7; 117 Stat. 541) is amended by striking 
     ``and bison'' and inserting ``bison, and horses''.
       (c) Applicability.--
       (1) In general.--This section and the amendments made by 
     this section apply to losses resulting from a disaster that 
     occurs on or after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Prior losses.--This section and the amendments made by 
     this section do not apply to losses resulting from a disaster 
     that occurred before the date of enactment of this Act.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, today: I am pleased to join with Senator 
McCain to introduce the City of Yuma Improvement Act of 2005. This bill 
authorizes the conveyance to the city of Yuma of six small parcels of 
Federal land currently held by the Bureau of Reclamation in exchange 
for three railroad parcels owned by the city on which the Bureau of 
Reclamation rail line exists. A companion bill has already been 
introduced in the House by Congressmen Grijalva and Franks.
  These land conveyances will enable the city to complete the 
redevelopment of the riverfront in downtown Yuma. The Riverfront Master 
Redevelopment Plan was approved by the City Council in November, 2001. 
The plan was developed through a joint planning process with the city 
and the developer. The city's responsibility is to amass the property 
along the riverfront. The developer must raise the needed capital. The 
redevelopment includes the development of a welcome center, a new 
hotel, a conference center, and mixed-use retail stores. This 
redevelopment is designed to connect Main Street with the Heritage Area 
and the river to enhance the quality of life of Yuma's citizens and one 
of the primary economic assets of the area--tourism.
  Most of the land in this 22 acre area is already city-owned. However, 
the Bureau of Reclamation does own several parcels within the 
redevelopment area that the city seeks to acquire. Since 2001, when the 
redevelopment plan was approved, the city and the Bureau have been 
working together to effectuate this acquisition for this public 
purpose. These efforts include: relocating, at the city's expense, the 
Bureau facilities that were within the redevelopment area and 
completing the necessary environmental analyses of the project area, 
including historic resource studies, site assessments, and asbestos and 
lead-based paint inspections.
  Essentially, the deal is complete with one exception: the authority 
to accomplish the conveyances. Currently, the Bureau of Reclamation 
does not have the authority to exchange the lands it possesses for the 
railroad parcels it seeks--it must be done legislatively. There is 
broad support in Yuma for this legislated land swap given its public 
purpose objectives, thorough planning, and the economic opportunity it 
brings. I hope my colleagues agree and will work with me to pass this 
legislation this year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ENZI (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Baucus, 
        Mr. Grassley, Mrs. Murray, and Mrs. Dole):
  S. 1531. A bill to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
to expand and intensify programs with respect to research and related 
activities concerning elder falls; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, these people all have something in common: 
the former Queen Mother of Britain; diet guru Dr. Robert Atkins; former 
Tonight Show co-host Ed McMahon; former first lady Nancy Reagan; and 
former Senator Bob Dole. What is it? They are all famous seniors who 
have suffered a fall during the past three years that had serious 
repercussions on their lives.
  Queen Elizabeth's mother had a history of falling. She underwent a 
major operation in 1995 to replace her right hip and had a second hip 
replacement in 1998 when she broke her left hip. In 2000, she tripped 
and fell in her sitting room and fractured the left-hand side of her 
collarbone. Then, in 2002 at 101-years-old, she stumbled again in her 
sitting room while getting up from a chair and cut her arm.
  Dr. Robert Atkins, the creator of the high-protein, low-carbohydrate 
Atkins diet, suffered a severe head trauma in 2003 when an accidental 
fall outside his New York office left him comatose. Although surgeons 
removed a blood clot to relieve the pressure on his brain, the 72-year-
old died eight days later.
  In March of this year, former Tonight Show co-host Ed McMahon spent 
his 82nd birthday in the hospital after a fall in his Beverly Hills 
home left him with a mild concussion and a gash in his head that 
required stitches.
  Just last month, former first lady Nancy Reagan slipped and fell in 
her London hotel room. Fortunately, she was not seriously injured, but 
was told by doctors to limit her activities for two weeks until the 
pain subsided and full mobility returned.
  The final story hits even closer to home. In January of this year, 
81-year-old former Senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole felt 
light-headed and suffered a near fatal fall while putting away a 
suitcase. After a quick trip to the hospital to stitch up a cut from 
his eyeglasses, he was taken back home. Later, he felt ill and had to 
be taken back to Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Doctors worked fast 
to save his life. In the fall he had severely damaged his left ``good'' 
arm, and he suffered bleeding in his head which was worsened by the 
blood thinners he was given a month earlier after a hip replacement 
operation. After spending 22 days at Walter Reed, he told a reporter 
that he was ``getting better slowly'' and that the recovery was 
``humiliating'' at times.
  As evidenced, falling is a very common and serious problem for older 
persons. These stories demonstrate the fact that falls can happen to 
anyone--even the rich and famous. A new report finds that although the 
life expectancy for Americans has reached an all-time high and senior 
citizens are more active than previous generations were, they are also 
reporting to emergency rooms in greater numbers for fall-related 
injuries. Falls can result in decreased physical function and mobility, 
disability, reduced independence, and a diminished quality of life. 
Loss of confidence and fear of falling can lead to further functional 
decline, depression, feelings of helplessness, and social isolation.
  The statistics are overwhelming. More than one-third of adults age 65 
years and older fall each year. Falls are the leading cause of injury 
deaths among individuals in that age group. In 2002, falls among older 
adults accounted for 12,800 deaths and 1,640,000 emergency department 
visits.
  Hospital admissions for hip fractures among the elderly have 
increased from 231,000 in 1988 to 327,000 in 2001. One in 5 older 
Americans who suffer a hip fracture die within a year, and 1 in 5 
people with a hip fracture end up in a nursing home within a year. 
Among people 75 years and older, those who fall are four to five times 
more likely to be admitted to a long-term care facility for a year or 
longer.
  Annually, more than 80,000 individuals who are over 65 years of age 
sustain a traumatic brain injury as a result of a fall.
  A recent study of people age 72 and older found that the average 
health care cost of a fall injury was $19,440. This figure does not 
include physician services. The total medical cost of all fall injuries 
for people age 65 and older was calculated in 2000 to be $19.5 billion. 
By 2020, the cost of fall injuries is expected to reach $43.8 billion, 
in current dollars.
  Given our aging population, by the year 2040, the number of hip 
fractures is expected to exceed 500,000--the annual cost of which is 
projected to be a shocking $240 billion.
  To make matters worse, given the aging baby boomers, more and more 
elderly will be susceptible to falls. By the year 2040, the 65 and 
older population will more than double to about 77.2 million, and the 
relative growth rate is even faster for people over 85.
  It seems that we've come to expect that a fall by an older relative 
is just a natural part of aging, when it is not. As the old adage says 
so well: ``An

[[Page 18987]]

ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'' Almost without 
exception, these falls are preventable. Older adults who have fallen 
previously or who stumble frequently are two to three times more likely 
to fall within the next year. We need to take action to ensure that 
doesn't happen.
  Last year, Senator Mikulski and I introduced the ``Keeping Seniors 
Safe From Falls Act of 2004,'' which passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent. Today, we are reintroducing this legislation, and we look 
forward to working with our colleagues so that it not only passes the 
Senate, but is signed into law.
  Our bill will direct the Department of Health and Human Services to 
oversee and support national and local education campaigns focusing on 
reducing falls among older adults and preventing repeat falls. It also 
calls for research in areas such as identifying older adults at high 
risk for falling; designing, implementing and evaluating the most 
effective fall prevention interventions; improving diagnosis, 
treatment, and rehabilitation of older adults who have fallen; 
tailoring effective strategies to specific populations; and eliminating 
barriers to adopting proven fall prevention strategies. In addition, 
the bill supports demonstration and research projects to improve the 
science behind preventing falls. It also requires the Secretary to 
evaluate the effect of falls on health care costs, the potential for 
reducing falls, and the most effective strategies for reducing fall-
related health care costs. Finally, the bill authorizes the 
appropriation of funds for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009 in 
order to carry out its provisions.
  I look forward to working again with Senator Mikulski, my colleagues 
on the HELP Committee, and the wide variety of groups who support this 
bill. I urge you to support this legislation that will help to keep our 
nation's seniors--ourselves, our family members, and our friends--safe 
from falls so that they may have a chance to fully enjoy and savor 
their ``golden years'' in a safer and healthier fashion.
  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. 1531

       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 ``Keeping Seniors Safe From 
     Falls Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Falls are the leading cause of injury deaths among 
     individuals who are over 65 years of age.
       (2) In 2002, falls among older adults accounted for 12,800 
     deaths and 1,640,000 emergency department visits.
       (3) Hospital admissions for hip fractures among the elderly 
     have increased from 231,000 admissions in 1988 to 327,000 in 
     2001.
       (4) Annually, more than 80,000 individuals who are over 65 
     years of age sustain a traumatic brain injury as a result of 
     a fall.
       (5) The total medical cost of all fall injuries for people 
     age 65 and older was calculated in 2000 to be 
     $19,500,000,000.
       (6) A national approach to reducing falls among older 
     adults, which focuses on the daily life of senior citizens in 
     residential, institutional, and community settings, is 
     needed.

     SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.

       Part J of title III of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 280b et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 393B (as added by section 1401 
     of Public Law 106-386) as section 393C and transferring such 
     section so that it appears after section 393B (as added by 
     section 1301 of Public Law 106-310); and
       (2) by inserting after section 393C (as redesignated by 
     paragraph (1)) the following:

     ``SEC. 393D. PREVENTION OF FALLS AMONG OLDER ADULTS.

       ``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
       ``(1) to develop effective public education strategies in a 
     national initiative to reduce falls among older adults in 
     order to educate older adults, family members, employers, 
     caregivers, and others;
       ``(2) to intensify services and conduct research to 
     determine the most effective approaches to preventing and 
     treating falls among older adults; and
       ``(3) to require the Secretary to evaluate the effect of 
     falls on health care costs, the potential for reducing falls, 
     and the most effective strategies for reducing health care 
     costs associated with falls.
       ``(b) Public Education.--The Secretary shall--
       ``(1) oversee and support a national education campaign to 
     be carried out by a nonprofit organization with experience in 
     designing and implementing national injury prevention 
     programs, that is directed principally to older adults, their 
     families, and health care providers, and that focuses on 
     reducing falls among older adults and preventing repeat 
     falls; and
       ``(2) award grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements to 
     qualified organizations, institutions, or consortia of 
     qualified organizations and institutions, for the purpose of 
     organizing State-level coalitions of appropriate State and 
     local agencies, safety, health, senior citizen, and other 
     organizations to design and carry out local education 
     campaigns, focusing on reducing falls among older adults and 
     preventing repeat falls.
       ``(c) Research.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
       ``(A) conduct and support research to--
       ``(i) improve the identification of older adults who have a 
     high risk of falling;
       ``(ii) improve data collection and analysis to identify 
     fall risk and protective factors;
       ``(iii) design, implement, and evaluate the most effective 
     fall prevention interventions;
       ``(iv) improve strategies that are proven to be effective 
     in reducing falls by tailoring these strategies to specific 
     populations of older adults;
       ``(v) conduct research in order to maximize the 
     dissemination of proven, effective fall prevention 
     interventions;
       ``(vi) intensify proven interventions to prevent falls 
     among older adults;
       ``(vii) improve the diagnosis, treatment, and 
     rehabilitation of elderly fall victims and those at high risk 
     for falls; and
       ``(viii) assess the risk of falls occurring in various 
     settings;
       ``(B) conduct research concerning barriers to the adoption 
     of proven interventions with respect to the prevention of 
     falls among older adults;
       ``(C) conduct research to develop, implement, and evaluate 
     the most effective approaches to reducing falls among high-
     risk older adults living in communities and long-term care 
     and assisted living facilities; and
       ``(D) evaluate the effectiveness of community programs 
     designed to prevent falls among older adults.
       ``(2) Educational support.--The Secretary, either directly 
     or through awarding grants, contracts, or cooperative 
     agreements to qualified organizations, institutions, or 
     consortia of qualified organizations and institutions, shall 
     provide professional education for physicians and allied 
     health professionals, and aging service providers in fall 
     prevention, evaluation, and management.
       ``(d) Demonstration Projects.--The Secretary shall carry 
     out the following:
       ``(1) Oversee and support demonstration and research 
     projects to be carried out by qualified organizations, 
     institutions, or consortia of qualified organizations and 
     institutions, in the following areas:
       ``(A) A multistate demonstration project assessing the 
     utility of targeted fall risk screening and referral 
     programs.
       ``(B) Programs designed for community-dwelling older adults 
     that utilize multicomponent fall intervention approaches, 
     including physical activity, medication assessment and 
     reduction when possible, vision enhancement, and home 
     modification strategies.
       ``(C) Programs that are targeted to new fall victims who 
     are at a high risk for second falls and which are designed to 
     maximize independence and quality of life for older adults, 
     particularly those older adults with functional limitations.
       ``(D) Private sector and public-private partnerships to 
     develop technologies to prevent falls among older adults and 
     prevent or reduce injuries if falls occur.
       ``(2)(A) Award grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements 
     to qualified organizations, institutions, or consortia of 
     qualified organizations and institutions, to design, 
     implement, and evaluate fall prevention programs using proven 
     intervention strategies in residential and institutional 
     settings.
       ``(B) Award 1 or more grants, contracts, or cooperative 
     agreements to 1 or more qualified organizations, 
     institutions, or consortia of qualified organizations and 
     institutions, in order to carry out a multistate 
     demonstration project to implement and evaluate fall 
     prevention programs using proven intervention strategies 
     designed for single and multifamily residential settings with 
     high concentrations of older adults, including--
       ``(i) identifying high-risk populations;
       ``(ii) evaluating residential facilities;
       ``(iii) conducting screening to identify high-risk 
     individuals;
       ``(iv) providing fall assessment and risk reduction 
     interventions and counseling;
       ``(v) coordinating services with health care and social 
     service providers; and
       ``(vi) coordinating post-fall treatment and rehabilitation.

[[Page 18988]]

       ``(3) Award 1 or more grants, contracts, or cooperative 
     agreements to qualified organizations, institutions, or 
     consortia of qualified organizations and institutions, to 
     conduct evaluations of the effectiveness of the demonstration 
     projects described in this subsection.
       ``(e) Study of Effects of Falls on Health Care Costs.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a review of 
     the effects of falls on health care costs, the potential for 
     reducing falls, and the most effective strategies for 
     reducing health care costs associated with falls.
       ``(2) Report.--Not later than 36 months after the date of 
     enactment of the Keeping Seniors Safe From Falls Act of 2005, 
     the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report describing 
     the findings of the Secretary in conducting the review under 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--In order to carry 
     out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated--
       ``(1) to carry out the national public education provisions 
     described in subsection (b)(1), $3,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2007 through 2009;
       ``(2) to carry out the State public education campaign 
     provisions of subsection (b)(2), $5,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 2007 through 2009;
       ``(3) to carry out research projects described in 
     subsection (c), $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 
     through 2009;
       ``(4) to carry out the demonstration projects described in 
     subsection (d)(1), $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 
     through 2009; and
       ``(5) to carry out the demonstration and research projects 
     described in subsection (d)(2), $5,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2007 through 2009.''.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Enzi in 
introducing the Keeping Seniors Safe from Falls Act of 2005. Falls are 
a serious public health problem that affects millions of seniors each 
year. This bill expands research and education on elder falls to help 
keep seniors safe and in their own homes longer.
  The facts are staggering. One out of every three Americans over age 
65 falls every year. In 2002, over 12,800 seniors died and 
approximately 1.6 million seniors visited an emergency department as a 
result of a fall. Falls are the leading cause of injury deaths among 
seniors. It is estimated that annually more than 80,000 individuals 
over 65 years of age sustain a traumatic brain injury as a result of a 
fall. Falls can be financially disastrous for families, and falls place 
a serious financial strain on our health care system. By 2020, senior 
falls are estimated to cost the health care system more than $32 
billion.
  These facts do not begin to tell the story of what falls can mean for 
seniors and their loved ones. Falls don't discriminate. Many of us have 
friends or relatives who have fallen. A fall can have a devastating 
impact on a person's physical, emotional, and mental health. If an 
older woman loses her footing on her front porch steps, falls, and 
suffers a hip fracture, she would likely spend about two weeks in the 
hospital, and there is a 50 percent chance that she would not return 
home or live independently as a result of her injuries.
  With some help, there are simple ways that seniors can improve the 
safety of their homes and make a fall far less likely. Home 
modifications like hand rails in the bathroom, rubber mats on slippery 
tile floors, and cordless telephones that seniors can keep nearby can 
make a big difference. Well trained pharmacists can review medications 
to make sure that two drugs do not interact to cause dizziness and 
throw a senior off balance.
  That is why I teamed up with Senator Enzi to introduce this important 
bill. This legislation is about getting behind our Nation's seniors and 
giving help to those who practice self-help. This bill creates public 
education campaigns for seniors, their families, and health care 
providers about how to prevent falls. It expands research on elder 
falls to develop better ways to prevent falls and to improve the 
treatment and rehabilitation of elder falls victims. This legislation 
also requires an evaluation of the effect of falls on health care 
costs, ways we can reduce falls, and effective solutions that can be 
adopted that can help reduce health care costs associated with falls.
  Reducing the number of falls will help seniors live longer, 
healthier, more independent lives. This bill has the strong support of 
the National Safety Council, the Home Safety Council and the National 
Council on Aging, and has been supported in the past by over 30 
national and local aging and safety organizations. I look forward to 
working with Senator Enzi and my colleagues on the Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions Committee to get this bill signed into law.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Grassley):
  S. 1532. A bill to amend title 18 of the United States Code to 
criminalize acts of agroterrorism, and to enhance the protection of the 
United States agricultural industry and food security through the 
increased prevention, detection, response and recovery planning; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition today to introduce the 
Agroterrorism Prevention Act of 2005, which would amend Title 18 of the 
United States Code to criminalize acts of agroterrorism, and to enhance 
the protection of the United States agricultural industry and food 
security through increased prevention, detection, response and recovery 
planning.
  Since the events of September 11, 2001, Congress has taken 
substantive actions to protect America and indeed, the world from the 
threat of terrorism. Yet, there is a significant component of the 
United States that is at risk from terrorist attacks, and that is 
American agriculture. The United States agriculture industry accounts 
for 13 percent of the Nation's gross domestic product, makes up 8 
percent of our foreign trade, and accounts for over $192 billion in 
cash receipts. More specifically in Pennsylvania, agriculture is the 
number one industry with over 59,000 farms and ranches producing cash 
receipts exceeding $4 billion annually. Less than 2 percent of the 
American people are considered farmers or ranchers; however, they are 
responsible for feeding 100 percent of the American population. It is 
incumbent upon us in Congress to do everything in our power to ensure 
that the American farmer and rancher, and our Nation's food supply, are 
protected from any act of terrorism.
  During the 108th Congress, I held four forums on the issue of 
agroterrorism and food security at the Pennsylvania Department of 
Agriculture working in conjunction with the PA Secretary of Agriculture 
to address the needs and concerns of Pennsylvania's producers, 
processors, commodity representatives, veterinarians, public health 
officials, university administrators, and local government 
representatives. Collectively, the comments and issues raised at these 
forums provided the impetus to craft this necessary and timely 
legislation.
  This legislation would afford the American farmer, rancher, and the 
United States agriculture industry the protection it deserves. My bill 
would amend Title 18 of the United States Code to criminalize the act 
of agroterrorism, ensuring that we have a legal recourse against 
individuals seeking to disrupt our interstate commerce and foreign 
trade, or who try to coerce our civilian population or government. An 
agroterrist act would be defined as a criminal act that consists of 
causing, financing, or attempting to cause damage or harm to, or 
destruction of, a crop, livestock, raw agricultural commodity, food 
product, farm or ranch equipment, a material, or any other property 
associated with agriculture, or a person engaged in an agricultural 
activity, that is committed to intimidate or coerce a civilian 
population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or 
coercion; or to disrupt interstate commerce or foreign commerce of the 
United States agricultural industry. Further, I have included the death 
penalty provision in this legislation to be consistent with existing 
laws concerning acts of terrorism.
  Beyond criminalizing the act of agroterrorism, this legislation would 
provide farmers and ranchers with on-farm bio-security resources; tools 
that reduce the potential for disease outbreaks. Through these 
resources, our farmers and ranchers would be able develop preparedness, 
response and recovery planning techniques. These techniques would 
enable farmers and ranchers to control access to their farms,

[[Page 18989]]

separate animal shipping vehicles from animal feed facilities, and know 
what risks visitors present. Ultimately, the intent of this provision 
is to ensure that our first responders have the information, training, 
and critical infrastructure they need to react aggressively to an 
incident of agroterrorism.
  The impact of globalization affects agriculture in ways that many 
would be unaware. For example, livestock and crop diseases can be 
obtained and disseminated with ever increasing ease. These diseases are 
endemic to other parts of the world and can be extracted from common 
materials, such as soil. Additionally, agricultural inspections at 
ports of entry, the first line of defense against the entry of foreign 
animal and plant diseases, have declined over the last two years at a 
time when imports have increased. Therefore, I have called for the 
Secretaries of Homeland Security, Agriculture, Interior, Health and 
Human Services, the Attorney General, and the Director of National 
Intelligence to coordinate and enhance monitoring, surveillance, and 
intelligence capabilities concerning threats, delivery systems, border 
controls, and actions that could be directed against the agriculture 
sector.
  This legislation would authorize significant grant funding for States 
to establish state and local emergency response plans, information 
management, and to provide training for first responders, in the event 
of an animal or plant disease outbreak. The 2001 foot and mouth disease 
outbreak in England required extensive intervention to eradicate and 
control the spread of disease. Therefore, the question remains if our 
Nation is ready to respond to such an outbreak, whether caused by a 
natural event or an act of terrorism.
  Additionally, this legislation would authorize funding for pilot 
grant demonstrations concerning on-farm bio-security. The majority of 
our Nation's farmers, ranchers, and processors are family owned or 
small businesses, and they need our assistance in strengthening and 
changing their practices to meet the challenges they are facing in this 
war on terror. It is our duty as their representatives to provide the 
tools they need to preserve the American farm and ranch.
  This legislation would ensure that our National Veterinary Stockpile 
contains sufficient amounts of animal vaccine, antiviral, or 
therapeutic products to appropriately respond to the most damaging 
animal diseases affecting human health and the economy. Additionally, 
let us not think that agroterrorism pertains only to animals. A plant 
disease event can impact our agricultural economy as well. Therefore, I 
have included provisions to ensure that our U.S. National Germplasm 
system can respond to such an event with the use of disease-resistant 
seed varieties.
  Compounding the threat of agroterrorism is the fact that the United 
States is currently experiencing a shortage of veterinarians in rural 
agricultural areas. This results in an inability to respond to a 
disease outbreak whether natural or an act of terrorism. In response to 
this decline, this legislation would provide both educational debt 
repayment for veterinarians serving American agriculture during a 
disease outbreak and capacity building grants for colleges and schools 
of veterinary medicine to design higher education training programs in 
exotic animal diseases, epidemiology, and public health.
  The last provision of this legislation would require the Secretaries 
of Homeland Security, Agriculture, HHS, Interior, and the Administrator 
of EPA to submit a report to Congress that describes the feasibility 
and need for modernizing or replacing current federal Biological Level 
3 and Biological Level 4 laboratories responsible for research, 
technology development, diagnostic, and forensic activities on plant 
and animal diseases, including zoonotic diseases. As a nation we cannot 
adequately fight a modern war on terrorism using technology and 
laboratories that have exceeded their capability and useful life span.
  I urge my colleagues to cosponsor and support this legislation, which 
would secure our Nation's most critical infrastructure, our food 
supply. As a nation, we cannot take for granted that our food supply 
will not be susceptible to terrorist activities. The measures called 
for in this legislation would not impose any new regulations on our 
farmers, ranchers, or processors but rather would provide them with the 
tools necessary to counteract agroterrorism. Without question, the time 
has come for concerted action to ensure the protection of American 
agriculture.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 1533. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a tax incentive to individuals teaching in elementary and secondary 
schools located in rural or high unemployment areas and to individuals 
who achieve certification from the National Board of Professional 
Teaching Standards, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, today, I rise, along with my 
cosponsor, Senator DeWine, to reintroduce legislation called I TEACH, 
Incentives to Educate America's Children Act of 2005. This legislation 
is an investment to support teachers in rural areas, and high poverty 
areas. It provides a $1,000 refundable tax credit for those teachers 
willing to serve in challenging schools. The bill also gives every 
teacher the chance to earn a refundable tax credit by offering a $1,000 
refundable tax credit for every teacher who earns accreditation by the 
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. A National Board 
Teacher in a rural school or high poverty school would receive a $2,000 
credit which hopefully would promote retention of our best teachers.
  According to the most recent survey by the American Federation of 
Teachers, the average teacher salary is $45,771. While teacher salaries 
rose an average of 3.3 percent, the health insurance benefits spiked an 
average 13 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 
starting salary for a new teacher is estimated to be $30,496. Given the 
costs of college, the average student graduates with a debt of $19,400 
and face loan payments of $210 a month, it is difficult for young, 
eager graduates to pursue careers in teaching and pay off their student 
debt and other living expenses.
  It is sad when a dedicated young person decides that they simply 
cannot ``afford'' to be a teacher, but this happens. The I TEACH Act 
will help by providing meaningful tax credits to teachers willing to 
serve in rural areas or high poverty schools, and it will provide a 
strong financial incentive to keep quality teachers in the classrooms 
by rewarding teachers who earn National Board certification. Thirty 
States provide some type of financial incentive to National Board 
teachers, and this refundable tax credit will support such efforts. For 
example, West Virginia offers a $2,500 bonus for National Board 
teachers. If I TEACH is enacted, a National Board teacher in my State 
would receive a 9 percent bonus which is a meaningful incentive.
  Our teachers are essential professionals that inspire and educate our 
children, who represent the next generation. Our teachers deserve our 
respect and real support. I urge my colleagues to work with me to enact 
I TEACH and reward our teachers.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA:
  S. 1537. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for 
the establishment of Parkinson's Disease Research Education and 
Clinical Centers in the Veterans Health Administration of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs and Multiple Sclerosis Centers of 
Excellence; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise proudly today to introduce 
legislation that would establish Parkinson's Disease Research Education 
and Clinical Centers and Multiple Sclerosis, MS, Centers of Excellence 
in the Veterans Health Administration of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, VA. The need for research and care is extremely pressing at a 
time when VA is dealing with meeting the demands of veterans suffering 
from debilitating neurological diseases.

[[Page 18990]]

  VA has been a leader in the advancement of medicine and should be 
applauded for its progressive and innovative research endeavors. Yet, 
continued strides in specialized research are necessary to address the 
specific health care needs of our veterans. Through the establishment 
of the Parkinson's Disease and Multiple Sclerosis Centers, VA 
clinicians and educators will be able to gain a better understanding of 
these diseases that affect not just our veterans, but Americans across 
the nation. It is through this understanding that clinicians will be 
able to provide more effective patient care, treatment, and education.
  The establishment of the Parkinson's Disease Research Education and 
Clinical Centers stems from the same spirit that inspired the 
conception of a great alliance formed between VA and the National 
Parkinson Foundation, Inc., NPF, in June of 1999. This alliance created 
an opportunity for the two entities to come together to develop 
research and treatment symposiums, provide information concerning 
Parkinson's disease, and also provide VA physicians that treat at least 
20,000 Parkinson's patients with continuing education.
  Those affected with Parkinson's Disease not only suffer from symptoms 
that manifest themselves physically, such as through tremors, muffled 
speech, slowness and impaired mobility. There are also psychological 
effects characterized in the form of depression for those suffering 
from this diseases. Through these centers, clinicians and educators can 
determine better ways to manage symptoms associated with Parkinson's 
Disease, as well as those symptoms such as fatigue and spasticity 
associated with MS that will give veterans suffering from these 
diseases a better quality of life.
  Since the time of its inception, the VA health care system was tasked 
with meeting the special needs of its veteran patients. Though VA is 
providing the necessary care to those currently affected by the 
disease, more can be done to develop new treatments to reduce the 
symptoms and slow down the progression of the disease.
  This legislation will provide VA with the opportunity to establish 
these centers and mark a new phase in the pursuit of enhanced treatment 
for those that struggle with the daily challenges imposed by these 
diseases, which includes not only the veteran patients but their 
families as well. The Parkinson's Disease Research Education and 
Clinical Centers and Multiple Sclerosis Centers of Excellence will also 
be beacons of hope towards finding a cure for degenerative neurological 
diseases.
  I ask my colleagues for their support of this bill as a commitment to 
advancing research and education for veterans battling Parkinson's 
Disease and Multiple Sclerosis. I also wish to thank Congressman Lane 
Evans, who serves as the ranking member of the House Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs, for his leadership on this issue.
  I ask unanimous consent that the full 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. 1537

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

     SECTION 1. PARKINSON'S DISEASE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, CLINICAL 
                   CENTERS, AND MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS CENTERS OF 
                   EXCELLENCE.

       (a) Requirement for Establishment of Centers.--
       (1) In general.--Subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 38, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 7329. Parkinson's disease research, education, and 
       clinical centers and multiple sclerosis centers of 
       excellence

       ``(a) Designation.--The Secretary, upon the recommendation 
     of the Under Secretary for Health and pursuant to the 
     provisions of this section, shall--
       ``(1) designate--
       ``(A) at least 6 Department health care facilities as the 
     locations for centers of Parkinson's disease research, 
     education, and clinical activities and (subject to the 
     appropriation of sufficient funds for such purpose); and
       ``(B) at least 2 Department health care facilities as the 
     locations for Multiple Sclerosis Centers of Excellence 
     (subject to the appropriation of sufficient funds for such 
     purpose); and
       ``(2) establish and operate such centers at such locations 
     in accordance with this section.
       ``(b) Existing Facilities; Geographic Distribution.--In 
     designating locations for centers under subsection (a), the 
     Secretary, upon the recommendation of the Under Secretary for 
     Health, shall--
       ``(1) designate each Department health care facility that, 
     as of January 1, 2005, was operating a Parkinson's Disease 
     Research, Education, and Clinical Center or a Multiple 
     Sclerosis Center of Excellence unless the Secretary, on the 
     recommendation of the Under Secretary for Health, determines 
     that such facility--
       ``(A) does not meet the requirements of subsection (c);
       ``(B) has not demonstrated effectiveness in carrying out 
     the established purposes of such center; or
       ``(C) has not demonstrated the potential to carry out such 
     purposes effectively in the reasonably foreseeable future; 
     and
       ``(2) assure appropriate geographic distribution of such 
     facilities.
       ``(c) Minimum Requirements.--The Secretary may not 
     designate a health care facility as a location for a center 
     under subsection (a) unless--
       ``(1) the peer review panel established under subsection 
     (d) determines that the proposal submitted by such facility 
     is among those proposals which meet the highest competitive 
     standards of scientific and clinical merit; and
       ``(2) the Secretary, upon the recommendation of the Under 
     Secretary for Health, determines that the facility has (or 
     may reasonably be anticipated to develop)--
       ``(A) an arrangement with an accredited medical school 
     which provides education and training in neurology and with 
     which such facility is affiliated under which residents 
     receive education and training in innovative diagnosis and 
     treatment of chronic neurodegenerative diseases and movement 
     disorders, including Parkinson's disease, or in the case of 
     Multiple Sclerosis Centers, multiple sclerosis disease;
       ``(B) the ability to attract the participation of 
     scientists who are capable of ingenuity and creativity in 
     health-care research efforts;
       ``(C) a policymaking advisory committee composed of 
     consumers and appropriate health care and research 
     representatives of the facility and of the affiliated school 
     or schools to advise the directors of such facility and such 
     center on policy matters pertaining to the activities of such 
     center during the period of the operation of such center;
       ``(D) the capability to conduct effectively evaluations of 
     the activities of such center;
       ``(E) the capability to coordinate, as part of an 
     integrated national system, education, clinical, and research 
     activities within all facilities with such centers;
       ``(F) the capability to jointly develop a consortium of 
     providers with interest in treating neurodegenerative 
     diseases, including Parkinson's disease, and other movement 
     disorders, or multiple sclerosis in the case of Multiple 
     Sclerosis Centers, at facilities without such centers in 
     order to ensure better access to state of the art diagnosis, 
     care, and education for neurodegenerative disorders, or in 
     the case of Multiple Sclerosis Centers, autoimmune disease 
     affecting the cental nervous system throughout the health 
     care system; and
       ``(G) the capability to develop a national repository in 
     the health care system for the collection of data on health 
     services delivered to veterans seeking care for 
     neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease, 
     and other movement disorders, or in the case of Multiple 
     Sclerosis Centers, autoimmune disease affecting the central 
     nervous system.
       ``(d) Panel.--(1) The Under Secretary for Health shall 
     establish a panel to assess the scientific and clinical merit 
     of proposals that are submitted to the Secretary for the 
     establishment of new centers under this section.
       ``(2)(A) The membership of the panel shall consist of 
     experts in neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's 
     disease and other movement disorders, and, in the case of 
     Multiple Sclerosis Centers, experts in autoimmune disease 
     affecting the central nervous system.
       ``(B) Members of the panel shall serve as consultants to 
     the Department for a period of no longer than 2 years except 
     in the case of panelists asked to serve on the initial panel 
     as specified in subparagraph (C).
       ``(C) In order to ensure panel continuity, half of the 
     members of the first panel shall be appointed for a period of 
     3 years and half for a period of 2 years.
       ``(3) The panel shall review each proposal submitted to the 
     panel by the Under Secretary and shall submit its views on 
     the relative scientific and clinical merit of each such 
     proposal to the Under Secretary.
       ``(4) The panel shall not be subject to the Federal 
     Advisory Committee Act.
       ``(e) Adequate Funding.--Before providing funds for the 
     operation of any such center at a health care facility other 
     than a health care facility designated under subsection 
     (b)(1), the Secretary shall ensure that--

[[Page 18991]]

       ``(1) the Parkinson's disease center at each facility 
     designated under subsection (b)(1) is receiving adequate 
     funding to enable such center to function effectively in the 
     areas of Parkinson's disease research, education, and 
     clinical activities; and
       ``(2) in the case of a new Multiple Sclerosis Center, that 
     existing centers are receiving adequate funding to enable 
     such centers to function effectively in the areas of multiple 
     sclerosis research, education, and clinical activities.
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--(1) There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary 
     for the support of the research and education activities of 
     the centers established under subsection (a).
       ``(2) The Under Secretary for Health shall allocate to such 
     centers from other funds appropriated generally for the 
     Department medical services account and medical and 
     prosthetics research account, as appropriate, such amounts as 
     the Under Secretary for Health determines appropriate.
       ``(g) Funding Eligibility and Priority for Parkinson's 
     Disease Research.--Activities of clinical and scientific 
     investigation at each center established under subsection (a) 
     for Parkinson's disease shall--
       ``(1) be eligible to compete for the award of funding from 
     funds appropriated for the Department medical and prosthetics 
     research account; and
       ``(2) receive priority in the award of funding from such 
     account to the extent funds are awarded to projects for 
     research in Parkinson's disease and other movement disorders.
       ``(h) Funding Eligibility and Priority for Multiple 
     Sclerosis Research.--Activities of clinical and scientific 
     investigation at each center established under subsection (a) 
     for multiple sclerosis shall--
       ``(1) be eligible to compete for the award of funding from 
     funds appropriated for the Department medical and prosthetics 
     research account; and
       ``(2) receive priority in the award of funding from such 
     account to the extent funds are awarded to projects for 
     research in multiple sclerosis and other movement 
     disorders.''.
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 73 of title 38, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 7328 
     the following:

``Sec. 7329. Parkinson's disease research, education, and clinical 
              centers and multiple sclerosis centers of excellence''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 7329 of title 38, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take effect on 
     October 1, 2005.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 1538. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 
the incentives for the construction and renovation of public schools; 
to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. ROCKFELLER. Mr. President, today, I am reintroducing America's 
Better Classroom Act, an important incentive to support school 
construction and renovations. I believe that this bill is a wise 
investment in education and economic development. It creates jobs as we 
build and renovate our schools.
  America's Better Classroom Act of 2005 is designed to respond to the 
overwhelming need for school construction. The Department of Education 
reports that the average public school building is 42 years old. In 
1995, GAO estimated that we needed $112 billion for school construction 
and renovations. A more recent survey in 2001 in the Journal of 
Education Finance indicates that the need is increasing, and the unmet 
need for school infrastructure over the next decade is over $200 
billion. My State, West Virginia, will need as much as $2 billion for 
school construction and renovations, and the cost of construction 
increases as the cost of building materials continues to escalate.
  America's Better Classroom Act provides the financial tools to help 
build and renovate our schools. It will continue the Qualified Zone 
Academy Bonding, (QZAB) Program that has helped economically 
disadvantaged communities. This provision would provide $2.8 billion to 
continue and expand the successful QZAB Program. In recent years, this 
program has provided $4.2 million for support school construction and 
renovations in disadvantaged communities. Effective programs deserve 
continued support.
  But we should more broadly expand investment in school construction 
because so many school districts need help with school construction and 
renovations but cannot qualify for the QZAB program. This is why the 
America's Better Classroom Act creates a $22 billion Qualified School 
Bonding Program. Funding will be allocated to states based on the Title 
1 formula so it is targeted, but the states will have flexibility in 
allocating support among school districts.
  When I visit schools in West Virginia, I am often stunned by the 
aging buildings and compelling needs. In our fast-growing Eastern 
Panhandle, we need new schools to deal with a growing population. In 
other parts of the State, older school building need renovations to be 
safe and conducive learning environments for our students. Also as 
technology plays an increasingly important role in education, 
classrooms need to be updated.
  States and communities need the America's Better Classroom Act so 
that we can make needed investments. Also, school construction can play 
a positive role in helping to stimulate our economy and create needed 
jobs. School construction is a reliable economic stimulus, and an 
important investment in our children's education.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 1539. A bill to amend part E of title IV of the Social Security 
Act to promote the adoption of children with special needs; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, throughout my career in the Senate, I 
have sought to strengthen and improve policies for the most vulnerable 
children children who are at-risk of abuse and neglect in their own 
homes. The foster care system is the basic safety net for such 
children, but common sense tells us that a safe permanent home is the 
best place for a child. As Congress clearly stated in the 1997 Adoption 
and Safe Families Act, every child deserves a safe, permanent home. Now 
the challenge is to reform our program to deliver on this promise.
  To truly fulfill that goal, we need to improve the Federal adoption 
assistance program, which is why I am introducing the Adoption Equality 
Act today. Current law only provides adoption assistance to special 
needs children whose parents would have been eligible for the old Aid 
to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) as of July 1996. It is 
ridiculous to base a child's eligibility for assistance on the income 
of the abusive parents from whom they will have been taken for their 
own health and safety. Because of this Federal regulation, only half of 
special needs children get Federal assistance under current law. I 
firmly believe that every child with special needs who will not be 
adopted without assistance deserves Federal support. It is a basic 
investment to delivering on our commitment to help provide a safe, 
permanent home.
  As we talk about the importance of families, shouldn't we invest in 
helping to create and maintain such families, especially for our most 
vulnerable children?
  By supporting the Adoption Equality Act, we send a clear signal that 
every child deserves a safe, permanent home.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1540. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Army and the 
Secretary of the Interior to establish a program to improve water 
management and contribute to the recovery of endangered species in the 
Middle Rio Grande, New Mexico, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, in the American West, we are frequently 
faced with the challenge of how best to allocate our scarce water 
resources among numerous competing interests. There is no better 
example of this challenge than the one that has developed in the past 
six years in the Middle Rio Grande Valley in my home State of New 
Mexico. However, how this challenge was addressed is illustrative of 
what can be accomplished when people are willing to put adversity and 
divergent interests aside and work together to solve common problems.
  In 1994, the Fish and Wildlife Service listed as endangered the Rio 
Grande Silvery Minnow, a fish native to the waters of the Rio Grande in 
New Mexico. The listing was followed by a five-year drought which began 
in 1999. The

[[Page 18992]]

drought resulted in an insufficient amount of water to meet the needs 
of the Silvery Minnow and led several environmental groups to file the 
lawsuit Minnow v. Keys in Federal district court. After the district 
court issued a decision, the case was appealed to the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit which held that the Endangered 
Species Act required that water should be taken away from 
municipalities, farmers and industry in order to meet the needs of the 
Silvery Minnow. In a water-scarce State like New Mexico, the ruling 
rang out like a gun shot and created acrimony amongst those who are 
entirely dependant on water from the Rio Grande.
  In response, I established the Middle Rio Grande Collaborative 
Program in 2000. The program is based on the premise that it is better 
to work in the spirit of cooperation to develop solutions to shared 
problems regarding resource management including how best to meet the 
needs of our endangered species. When left up to the courts, there are 
always losers. Since 2000, the collaborative program has been a 
remarkable success, bringing together various stakeholders including 
Federal and State agencies, cities, Pueblos, environmental groups, 
farmers and business interests in an effort to protect our biological 
heritage and ecological diversity while meeting the needs of those who 
are dependant on the waters of the Rio Grande. Often, the process has 
been difficult. However, I'm sure all would agree that it is far 
preferable to the alternative of continued litigation. The success of 
the program is especially marked when one considers that the program 
has lacked specific goals, an organizational structure, a decision 
making hierarchy, and formal authorization.
  I rise today to introduce the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species 
Collaborative Program Act, a bill to provide the program with the 
authority it needs to continue its important mission. This bill would 
streamline the decision making process of the program, delegate 
responsibilities among federal agencies, and provide adequate authority 
for Federal participation. I have no doubt that this program will 
continue to serve as a model of how to deal with the West's resource 
management challenges.
  I would like to thank my dear friend and colleague Senator Bingaman, 
who I have had the pleasure of serving with in the United States Senate 
for the past 22 years for being an original co-sponsor of this 
legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1540

       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 ``Middle Rio Grande Endangered 
     Species Collaborative Program Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Collaborative program.--The term ``Collaborative 
     Program'' means the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species 
     Collaborative Program established under section 3(a).
       (2) Executive committee.--The term ``Executive Committee'' 
     means the Executive Committee established under section 4(c).
       (3) Interests in land and water.--The term ``interests in 
     land and water'' includes purchases, leases, easements, and 
     agreements to provide water storage, land, or water that are 
     obtained from willing sellers, lessors, or contributors in 
     compliance with applicable Federal, State, or tribal laws.
       (4) Middle rio grande.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``Middle Rio Grande'' means the 
     headwaters of the Rio Chama and the Rio Grande, including all 
     tributaries, from the State line between Colorado and New 
     Mexico downstream to the elevation corresponding with the 
     spillway crest of Elephant Butte Dam at 4,457.3 feet mean sea 
     level.
       (B) Exclusion.--The term ``Middle Rio Grande'' excludes the 
     land area reserved for the full pool of the Elephant Butte 
     Reservoir.
       (5) Middle rio grande conservancy district.--The term 
     ``Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District'' means the 
     political subdivision of the State of that name, created in 
     1925.
       (6) Project.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``project'' means a scientific or 
     management study, a planning, design, permitting, 
     construction, operations, maintenance, or replacement 
     activity, or the acquisition of interests in land or water.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``project'' includes--
       (i) a project begun but not completed by the Endangered 
     Species Collaborative Program before the date of enactment of 
     this Act; and
       (ii) a project recommended by the Executive Committee after 
     the date of enactment of this Act that carries out the 
     purposes described in section 3(b).
       (7) Rio grande compact.--The term ``Rio Grande Compact'' 
     means the Rio Grande Compact--
       (A) for which Congress provided consent under the Act of 
     May 31, 1939 (53 Stat. 785, chapter 155); and
       (B) that was ratified by the States of Colorado, New 
     Mexico, and Texas.
       (8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.
       (9) Signatory member.--The term ``signatory member'' means 
     any Federal, State, or municipal agency, tribe, or public or 
     private organization that has signed the memorandum of 
     agreement described in section 4(c)(1)(C).
       (10) Silvery minnow.--The term ``silvery minnow'' means the 
     species Hybognathus amarus, commonly known as the Rio Grande 
     silvery minnow, a fish listed as an endangered species, as 
     described in the notice entitled ``Final Rule to List the Rio 
     Grande Silvery Minnow as an Endangered Species'' (59 Fed. 
     Reg. 36988 (July 20, 1994)).
       (11) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of New 
     Mexico.
       (12) Tribe.--The term ``tribe'' means an Indian pueblo or 
     tribe that--
       (A) occupies land in the Middle Rio Grande; and
       (B) is included on the list of federally recognized tribes 
     published by the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with 
     section 104 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act 
     of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a-1).
       (13) Willow flycatcher.--The term ``willow flycatcher'' 
     means the species Empidonax traillii extimus, commonly known 
     as the southwestern willow flycatcher, a migratory bird 
     listed as an endangered species, as described in the notice 
     entitled ``Final Rule Determining Endangered Status for the 
     Southwestern Willow Flycatcher'' (60 Fed. Reg. 10694 
     (February 27, 1995)).

     SEC. 3. COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary, in collaboration with 
     the Secretary of the Interior, shall establish the Middle Rio 
     Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program in accordance 
     with section 4.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of the Collaborative Program 
     shall be--
       (1) to carry out a long-term plan, including projects to 
     protect, and promote recovery of, the silvery minnow and 
     willow flycatcher in the Middle Rio Grande;
       (2) to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act of 
     1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) while maintaining water use in 
     the Middle Rio Grande in compliance with applicable law;
       (3) to support improved water management;
       (4) to allow continued water development;
       (5) to benefit overall ecological integrity;
       (6) to promote cooperation and collaboration in 
     implementation of protection and recovery activities between 
     Federal and non-Federal entities;
       (7) to coordinate Federal actions that promote protection 
     and recovery of the silvery minnow and willow flycatcher; and
       (8) to establish a scientific basis for implementation of 
     activities through recovery plans to ensure protection and 
     recovery of the silvery minnow and willow flycatcher.

     SEC. 4. COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM STRUCTURE.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 209 of the Energy and Water 
     Development Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-137; 117 
     Stat. 1850) is repealed.
       (b) Establishment.--The Collaborative Program shall consist 
     of an Executive Committee, a Program Implementation Team, and 
     working groups.
       (c) Executive Committee.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, in collaboration with the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall--
       (A) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, establish an Executive Committee consisting of 
     Federal and non-Federal entities described in paragraph (2) 
     to--
       (i) provide guidance to the Program Implementation Team to 
     develop and approve a long-term plan to carry out the 
     purposes of the Collaborative Program;
       (ii) coordinate Collaborative Program projects for the 
     recovery of the silvery minnow and the willow flycatcher with 
     other Federal and non-Federal activities in the Middle Rio 
     Grande to achieve the greatest effect and limit unnecessary 
     duplication of efforts to the maximum extent practicable;
       (iii) create, assign, and oversee tasks of the Program 
     Implementation Team and working

[[Page 18993]]

     groups as necessary to implement a long-term plan and 
     otherwise accomplish the purposes of the Collaborative 
     Program;
       (iv) develop multiyear budget priorities and present 
     funding requests to the Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of 
     Reclamation, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 
     other Federal agencies, and non-Federal entities; and
       (v) review work products undertaken by the Collaborative 
     Program, including development of plans, budgets, reports, 
     and requests for proposals;
       (B) consider decisions made by \3/4\ of a quorum as the 
     recommendation to be carried out under the Collaborative 
     Program;
       (C) develop, consistent with this Act, a memorandum of 
     agreement describing--
       (i) the goals of the Collaborative Program;
       (ii) the responsibilities of the participants to contribute 
     to the success of the Collaborative Program; and
       (iii) the administrative rules, bylaws, and agreements 
     governing Collaborative Program participation; and
       (D) in cooperation with the members of the Executive 
     Committee, develop bylaws governing the operations of the 
     Executive Committee.
       (2) Membership.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Executive 
     Committee shall be composed of--
       (i) 1 permanent voting member representing the Bureau of 
     Reclamation, appointed by the Secretary of the Interior;
       (ii) 1 permanent voting member representing the United 
     States Fish and Wildlife Service, appointed by the Secretary 
     of the Interior;
       (iii) 1 permanent voting member representing the Corps of 
     Engineers, appointed by the Secretary;
       (iv) upon invitation by the Secretary, other voting members 
     who have signed the memorandum of agreement described in 
     paragraph (1)(C), representing any of--

       (I) the State of New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission;
       (II) the State of New Mexico Department of Game and Fish;
       (III) the New Mexico Attorney General;
       (IV) the Pueblo of Santo Domingo;
       (V) the Pueblo of Sandia;
       (VI) the Pueblo of Isleta;
       (VII) the Pueblo of Santa Ana;
       (VIII) the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District;
       (IX) the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Water Authority;
       (X) an organization that represents a significant portion 
     of the environmental community; and
       (XI) an organization that represents a significant portion 
     of the farming community; and

       (v) the non-Federal cochairperson elected under paragraph 
     (4); and
       (vi) upon unanimous recommendation of the existing members, 
     members representing any additional organizations that sign 
     the memorandum of agreement described in paragraph (1)(C).
       (B) Membership cap.--The total membership of the Executive 
     Committee shall not exceed 20 members.
       (C) Quorum.--
       (i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), \2/3\ 
     of the members of the Executive Committee shall constitute a 
     quorum.
       (ii) Exception.--For purposes of subparagraphs (A) and (C) 
     of paragraph (4), \2/3\ of the non-Federal members of the 
     Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum.
       (3) Federal cochairperson.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall select 
     a Federal Cochairperson from the Department of the Interior 
     who shall--
       (i) be a nonvoting member of the Executive Committee;
       (ii) convene the Executive Committee;
       (iii) develop committee agendas;
       (iv) call meetings;
       (v) schedule votes and other decisionmaking processes; and
       (vi) hold the Program Implementation Team accountable for 
     assignments received from the Executive Committee.
       (B) Removal.--The Federal Cochairperson may be replaced by 
     the Secretary on a vote of no-confidence by \3/4\ of a 
     quorum.
       (4) Non-federal cochairperson.--
       (A) In general.--A non-Federal Chairperson of the Executive 
     Committee shall be elected on approval by \3/4\ of a quorum.
       (B) Duties.--The non-Federal Chairperson shall--
       (i) be a voting member of the Executive Committee;
       (ii) establish the Executive Committee agenda jointly with 
     the Federal Cochairperson; and
       (iii) lead meetings in the absence of the Federal 
     Cochairperson.
       (C) Removal.--
       (i) In general.--The non-Federal Cochairperson may be 
     removed by the Secretary on a vote of no-confidence by \3/4\ 
     of a quorum.
       (ii) Vacancy.--If the non-Federal Chairperson is removed 
     under clause (i), the vacancy shall be filled in accordance 
     with subparagraph (A).
       (d) Program Implementation Team.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a Program 
     Implementation Team--
       (A) administered by a program manager from the Corps of 
     Engineers; and
       (B) supported by 1 representative of each entity with 
     membership on the Executive Committee that elects to provide 
     a representative.
       (2) Additional staff.--To support the goals of the 
     Collaborative Program, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     provide staff for the Program Implementation Team from--
       (A) the Bureau of Reclamation;
       (B) the Bureau of Indian Affairs;
       (C) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; or
       (D) any other appropriate agency of the Department of the 
     Interior.
       (3) Duties.--Under the direction of the Executive 
     Committee, the Program Implementation Team shall--
       (A) provide administrative support for all Collaborative 
     Program operations;
       (B) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, prepare a long-term plan to carry out the purposes 
     of the Collaborative Program;
       (C) consistent with the long-term plan, prepare annual 
     revisions, annual work plans, budget requests, and activity 
     and fiscal reports;
       (D) provide information to the public concerning activities 
     of the Collaborative Program and undertake community 
     outreach;
       (E) collaborate with other efforts relating to the 
     protection and recovery of the silvery minnow and willow 
     flycatcher carried out under other Federal programs and non-
     Federal programs, including--
       (i) silvery minnow and willow flycatcher recovery teams 
     under the direction of the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service;
       (ii) Bosque and ecosystem recovery programs under the 
     United States Fish and Wildlife Service and Corps of 
     Engineers; and
       (iii) other related programs;
       (F) administer project proposal processes;
       (G) administer contracts and grants, except for those 
     contracts and grants assigned to the Bureau of Reclamation;
       (H) ensure that all activities undertaken by the 
     Collaborative Program comply with applicable laws; and
       (I) undertake such other duties as are assigned by the 
     Executive Committee and necessary to carry out the 
     Collaborative Program.
       (e) Working Groups.--
       (1) In general.--The Executive Committee may create working 
     groups to--
       (A) provide advice to the Executive Committee and the 
     Program Implementation Team; and
       (B) implement tasks consistent with the purposes described 
     in section 3(b).
       (2) Membership.--Working groups established under paragraph 
     (1) may consist of--
       (A) members of the Program Implementation Team; and
       (B) individuals appointed by, and under the direction of, 
     the Program Implementation Team, including--
       (i) representatives appointed by the Executive Committee;
       (ii) signatory members; or
       (iii) individuals contracted by the Program Implementation 
     Team.

     SEC. 5. COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary and the Secretary of the 
     Interior may--
       (1) enter into any grants, contracts, cooperative 
     agreements, interagency agreements, or other agreements that 
     the Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior determine to 
     be necessary to carry out the Collaborative Program, 
     including interagency agreements to transfer funds between 
     agencies within the jurisdiction of the Secretary and the 
     Secretary of the Interior; and
       (2) accept or provide grants to carry out the Collaborative 
     Program.
       (b) Responsibilities.--In carrying out the purposes of the 
     Collaborative Program--
       (1) the Commissioner of Reclamation may--
       (A) carry out flow requirements to comply with the 
     Biological Opinion described in section 205(b) of the Energy 
     and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 
     108-447; 118 Stat. 2949) or any modifications to the 
     Biological Opinion and other projects relating to water 
     management, including--
       (i) acquiring interests in land and water to meet minimum 
     flow requirements;
       (ii) monitoring and gaging flows;
       (iii) pumping from the Low Flow Conveyance Channel and 
     other drains and channels to support silvery minnow and 
     willow flycatcher habitat; and
       (iv) improving monitoring and gaging;
       (B) consult with the signatory members regarding 
     opportunities and methods to accomplish the responsibilities;
       (C) coordinate implementation of all other activities 
     carried out within the Middle Rio Grande under the 
     jurisdiction of the Bureau of Reclamation with the activities 
     of the Collaborative Program to achieve the purposes of the 
     Collaborative Program; and
       (D) construct fish passages at San Acacia Diversion Dam and 
     at Isleta Diversion Dam;
       (2) the Secretary of the Army--
       (A) may carry out and fund additional projects not 
     designated to the Commissioner of Reclamation under paragraph 
     (1), including--
       (i) actions to induce overbank flooding and creation of 
     backwaters;
       (ii) salvaging eggs;

[[Page 18994]]

       (iii) improving monitoring and gaging;
       (iv) performing habitat and ecosystem restoration;
       (v) regeneration of native vegetation and monitoring of 
     associated water depletions;
       (vi) reconstructing a new San Marcial Railroad bridge and 
     realignment of the river channel;
       (vii) developing ways to--

       (I) increase sediment transport through Jemez Canyon Dam, 
     Galisteo Dam, and Cochiti Lake; and
       (II) address issues of contaminated sediment;

       (viii) preventing salt cedar encroachment in Angostura, 
     Isleta and San Acacia reaches;
       (ix) implementing captive propagation of silvery minnow, 
     including expansion of facilities;
       (x) creating at least 2 new naturalized refugia, 1 of which 
     shall be carried out in partnership with the Bureau of 
     Reclamation, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and 
     Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District without direct 
     oversight by the Collaborative Program, under the Silvery 
     Minnow Off-Channel Sanctuaries Program as authorized under 
     section 6014 of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 
     for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 
     2005 (Public Law 109-13; 119 Stat. 283);
       (xi) monitoring silvery minnow protection and recovery 
     efforts by conducting surveys of populations and habitat 
     above Cochiti Lake;
       (xii) developing comprehensive water quality assessments 
     and managing changes in water quality;
       (xiii) conducting studies and research necessary to define 
     the needs of listed species; and
       (xiv) monitoring the effects of activities on listed 
     species;
       (B) shall implement the decisions of the Executive 
     Committee in performing the activities described in 
     subparagraph (A); and
       (C) shall coordinate implementation of all other activities 
     carried out within the Middle Rio Grande by the Corps of 
     Engineers with the activities of the Collaborative Program in 
     order to achieve the purposes of the Collaborative Program.
       (c) Limitations.--
       (1) Acquisition of land or water.--In carrying out this 
     Act, the Secretary or the Secretary of the Interior may only 
     acquire interests in land and water.
       (2) Water rights.--Nothing in this Act preempts or affects 
     State water law or an interstate compact governing water.
       (3) Compliance.--All actions carried out in accordance with 
     this Act shall be in compliance with applicable State, 
     Federal, or tribal law.
       (4) Rio grande compact.--No action carried out under this 
     Act shall impair the ability of the State to meet the 
     obligations of the State under the Rio Grande compact.
       (5) State law.--The Secretary and the Secretary of the 
     Interior shall carry out activities under the Collaborative 
     Program consistent with State law.
       (6) Consultation.--
       (A) In general.--Consultations between governments under 
     this Act shall be carried out between the Secretary or the 
     Secretary of the Interior and tribes prior to initiating 
     actions that would impact tribal land or water rights.
       (B) Consent requirement.--No action involving access to, or 
     use of, pueblo or tribal land may be carried out without 
     prior written consent of the affected pueblo or Indian tribe.
       (7) Collaboration.--In carrying out this Act, the Secretary 
     and the Secretary of Interior may collaborate with or enter 
     into contracts, cooperative agreements, interagency 
     agreements, or other agreements with, or accept or provide 
     grants to, tribes that--
       (A) are signatory members; but
       (B) are not represented on the Executive Committee.
       (8) No effect on certain authority.--Nothing in this Act 
     diminishes the authority, sovereignty, or rights of any 
     person, organization, tribe, or other governmental entity.
       (9) No effect on certain duties.--
       (A) In general.--Nothing in this Act diminishes or 
     impairs--
       (i) the trust relationship or responsibility of the Federal 
     Government to any tribe;
       (ii) the obligation of the Federal Government to consult 
     with the tribes on a government-to-government basis; or
       (iii) the ability of the Federal Government to fund 
     activities for the benefit of the tribes.
       (B) Funding.--Nothing in this Act restricts the Secretary 
     or the Secretary of the Interior from funding activities in 
     accordance with the Indian trust responsibility of the 
     Federal Government.
       (10) No effect on reservoir operations.--While this Act 
     provides additional authorization for the Secretary and the 
     Secretary of the Interior, nothing expands the discretion of 
     the Secretary or the Secretary of the Interior with respect 
     to operating reservoir facilities under the jurisdiction of 
     the Secretary or the Secretary of the Interior in the Middle 
     Rio Grande.

     SEC. 6. REPORTING.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary and the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Committee on 
     Environment and Public Works and the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Resources of the House of Representatives a report that--
       (1) describes expenditure of appropriated funds and cost-
     share contributions;
       (2) describes activities carried out under this Act; and
       (3) describes compliance with the purposes of this Act.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior such sums as 
     are necessary to carry out this Act for each of fiscal years 
     2006 through 2015.
       (2) Nonreiumbursable.--Amounts made available pursuant to 
     paragraph (1) shall be considered nonreimbursable Federal 
     expenditures.
       (b) Cost Allocation.--
       (1) Activities at full federal expense.--
       (A) Water acquisition.--Water acquisition and the cost of 
     administration for water acquisition and water management by 
     the Bureau of Reclamation described in section 5(b)(1) shall 
     be carried out at full Federal expense.
       (B) Administration.--Administration of the Collaborative 
     Program, as described in section 4(d), including the 
     participation of Federal agencies in the Program 
     Implementation Team, shall be carried out at full Federal 
     expense.
       (2) Cost-share.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), all projects 
     or activities of the Collaborative Program not described in 
     paragraph (1) that are carried out by the Secretary or the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall require a non-Federal cost-
     share of 25 percent.
       (B) Limitation.--
       (i) In general.--The total non-Federal share required under 
     subparagraph (A) for all projects during the period of fiscal 
     years 2006 through 2015 shall be not more than $30,000,000.
       (ii) Federal expense.--On satisfaction of the total non-
     Federal share described in clause (i)--

       (I) no further non-Federal share shall be required; and
       (II) all projects and activities shall be carried out at 
     full Federal expense.

       (C) Contributions.--The cost-share under subparagraph (A) 
     may be provided as--
       (i) in-kind contributions, including participation on the 
     Program Implementation Team or in working groups, the value 
     of which shall be determined by Secretary; or
       (ii) direct cash contributions.
       (D) Programmatic basis.--The amount of the Federal and non-
     Federal cost-shares shall be determined on--
       (i) a programmatic, rather than project-by-project, basis; 
     and
       (ii) a 3-year interval with excess non-Federal cost-share 
     being credited to subsequent accounting periods.
       (c) Administrative Costs.--Not more than 15 percent of 
     amounts made available under subsection (a) shall be used to 
     pay the administrative costs of carrying out the Program 
     Implementation Team established under section 4(d).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Lautenberg, and Mr. 
        Levin):
  S. 1541. A bill to protect, conserve, and restore public land 
administered by the Department of the Interior or the Forest Service 
and adjacent land through cooperative cost-shared grants to control and 
mitigate the spread of invasive species, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Public Land 
Protection and Conservation Act of 2005. I am pleased to have Senators 
Inouye, Lautenberg and Levin join me in cosponsoring the bill. My 
legislation encourages Federal, State, and local agencies, nonprofit 
organizations, Indian tribes and private entities to work together 
through a cost-shared, cooperative grant program to control and 
mitigate the spread of invasive species.
  Invasive species are defined as harmful, nonnative plants, animals, 
or organisms likely to cause economic harm, environmental harm, or harm 
to human health. They are widespread throughout the United States and 
cause billions of dollars of damage annually to crops, rangelands, and 
waterways. The globalization of trade, the massive volume of cargo 
shipments, and rising tourism have combined to increase the chance of 
introductions of nonnative species into the United States. They are 
responsible for damage to native ecosystems and vital industries such 
as agriculture, fisheries, and ranching. The economic, social,

[[Page 18995]]

recreational, and ecological losses attributable to invasive species 
are huge. A recent Cornell University study estimated that invasive 
plants and animals cost the U.S. economy $137 billion annually. The 
costs are predicted to increase substantially as more invasive species 
enter the country.
  The implications of the nationwide invasive species problem are 
enormous. The Ecological Society of America notes that invasive species 
contribute to the listing of 35 to 46 percent of all threatened and 
endangered species. Nowhere, however, are the impacts greater than in 
my home State of Hawaii. Hawaii is known for its biodiversity. Hawaii 
has more than 10,000 species found nowhere else on Earth. 
Unfortunately, invasive species are the number one cause of the decline 
of Hawaii's threatened and endangered species. This is a serious 
concern because of the 114 endangered species that have become extinct 
during the first 20 years of the Endangered Species Act, almost half 
were in Hawaii. Recently, gall wasps were found laying eggs in wiliwili 
trees. These trees were once a dominant species in dry Hawaiian 
forests. Now they are nearly 90 percent gone with the remnants of the 
remaining trees, primarily found on Maui and the Big Island, threatened 
by the invasive gall wasp. The fragility of our native species is 
compounded by the fact that most introduced species have no natural 
predators in the State, and such predators cannot simply cross a State 
border to enter Hawaii. Hawaii's Invasive Species Partnerships, a group 
comprised of a state council and island-based committees stated in its 
2004 report that ``the silent invasion of Hawaii by alien invasive 
species is the single greatest threat to Hawaii's economy, natural 
environment, and the health and lifestyle of Hawaii's people and 
visitors.'' Hawaii is plagued with pest invasions to a greater extent 
than almost any other location in the world. The invasion has limited 
our agricultural export market, decreased bio-diversity in the forests, 
and decimated native bird populations. It is imperative that this 
serious issue receive our full attention.
  Let me give you just a few examples of invasive species problems in 
Hawaii. Control efforts for the Formosan ground termite are estimated 
to cost residents in Hawaii more than $150 million per year. Damage to 
our agricultural industry and the related control costs of the 
Mediterranean fruit fly are more than $450 million annually. Miconia, 
an invasive tree infesting more than 15,000 acres of rainforest in 
Hawaii, eliminates the habitat of endangered plants and animals and 
causes serious erosion problems that threaten our water supply. Bush 
Beardgrass is a drought-tolerant grass that increases the risk of 
brushfires. Wildlife authorities say the grass is beyond control on 
Kauai and the Big Island. Native birds in our rainforests are 
succumbing to malaria spread through introduced mosquitos. Coqui frogs 
can reach densities of 8,000 frogs per acre and threaten Hawaii's real 
estate, export floriculture, and nursery industries. The brown tree 
snake has invaded Guam and devastated native bird populations there. If 
the snakes become established in Hawaii, economic costs have been 
estimated to exceed hundreds of millions of dollars. Red fire ants 
threaten the agriculture industry in Hawaii and in 14 Southern States, 
causing more than $2 billion in annual damage. As you can see, the list 
of problems is long and the time to address the issue of invasive 
species is now, before even more serious problems crop up.
  With 73 percent of land in the continental U.S. held privately, our 
Federal lands will not be adequately protected without public-private 
partnerships. My bill requires coordination between the National 
Invasive Species Council, the Department of the Interior, the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, and State invasive species councils and 
plans. The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to provide 
grants to promote the development of voluntary State assessments to 
establish inventories and priorities for controlling invasive species. 
This is a critical step in establishing an invasives program, but many 
States do not have the resources to carry out this critical assessment. 
The legislation also provides additional grants to public or private 
entities, or Indian tribes, to carry out in partnership with a Federal 
agency an eradication, containment, or management project on Federal 
land or adjacent land. Control grants are cost-shared with partners. 
The criteria for ranking control projects include shared priorities in 
State and Federal plans, the severity of the invasive species impact on 
a State, and whether the project fosters results through public-private 
partnerships. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the bill provides 
rapid response funds for States facing new outbreaks of invasive 
species, to eradicate serious new outbreaks. Rapid response funds are 
critical to States in order to combat newly identified invasives.
  I was pleased to see that Federal departments would receive an 
overall increase for the seven invasive species general categories in 
the President's fiscal year 2006 proposed budget. I appreciate the 
consideration that my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee have 
given this important issue. However, I was dismayed to see that the 
budget for the category of control of invasive species declined by $25 
million from its fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Control is an 
essential element in combating invasive species and requires additional 
funding.
  I would like to acknowledge the fine work being accomplished by the 
National Park Service in establishing its Exotic Plant Management 
Teams. These Teams are designed to provide a highly trained, mobile 
strike force of plant management specialists to assist parks in the 
control of exotic plants. Approximately 2.6 million acres in the 
national parks are infected and 234 parks have invasive animals in need 
of management. To date, 17 Teams have been deployed throughout the 
country. I am grateful to the Pacific Island Team for its efforts to 
protect increasingly rare native communities in the Hawaiian Islands 
from invasion. Control of exotic species is one of the most significant 
land management issues facing national parks. Although I applaud the 
current efforts of the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest 
Service, a more coordinated and forceful attack on invasive species is 
needed. The attack must have robust funding and work in partnership 
with the States.
  I am particularly pleased that the State of Hawaii is taking a 
leadership role in addressing its invasive species problems. Two years 
ago the Hawaii State Legislature established the Hawaii Invasive 
Species Council to coordinate the State's fight against animal and 
plant invaders, with the Department of Agriculture and the Department 
of Land and Natural Resources in leading roles. The Hawaii State 
Legislature has directed approximately $8 million to the invasives 
campaign so far. The Hawaii Invasive Species Council and each county 
council are committed to a proactive approach to preserve the 
environmental heritage and economic security of our communities for 
generations to come. In addition, many public and private partnerships 
have been formed to protect our common natural resources. For example, 
the East Maui Watershed Partnership brings together multiple public and 
private landowners and the County of Maui to control invasive species 
and protect 100,000 acres of our prime watershed areas. This is just 
one example of many highly successful and dedicated partnerships in 
Hawaii working to preserve our invaluable resources.
  The National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species, a coalition 
of representatives from major environmental organizations, has extended 
its full support for this legislation. Its letter of support calls this 
bill ``one of the best legislative proposals to date to deal with the 
growing threat that invasive species pose to our nation's ecological 
and economic health.'' The State of Hawaii, Department of Land and 
Natural Resources, also supports the bill. The Department acknowledges 
that success in invasive species projects in Hawaii have come largely

[[Page 18996]]

from the formation of strong partnerships between State, County and 
Federal agencies and private groups -exactly what my legislation 
endorses. My bill is also supported by the Conservation Council of 
Hawaii, the National Wildlife Federation affiliate in Hawaii. I greatly 
appreciate these endorsements.
  As Federal efforts to combat the growing tide of invasive species 
increase, some landowners and private property advocates are concerned 
that increased efforts to combat invasives and support native plants 
and animals could lead to the next big government invasion of private 
lands. Let me assure you this is not a property rights issue. Any 
action taken by governments or nonprofits through this bill can occur 
only with the participation and willingness of the property owner.
  There are increasingly severe problems and economic burdens 
associated with invasive species in our Nation that are borne at the 
State and local levels. If ever there was a time to commit to defending 
the security of our domestic resources for the future, it is now. My 
legislation provides the support necessary for agencies, organizations, 
and individuals to implement cooperative projects to address new 
threats and long-standing invasive species problems. This is an issue 
that must be confronted.
  I ask unanimous consent that text of the bill be printed in the 
Record, as well as the letters of support from Hawaii and national 
groups, and urge my colleagues to support my legislation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1541

       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 ``Public Land Protection and 
     Conservation Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to encourage partnerships among 
     Federal, State, and local agencies, nongovernmental entities, 
     and Indian tribes to protect, enhance, restore, and manage 
     public land and adjacent land through the control of invasive 
     species by--
       (1) promoting the development of voluntary State 
     assessments to establish priorities for controlling invasive 
     species;
       (2) promoting greater cooperation among Federal, State, and 
     local land and water managers and owners of private land or 
     other interests to implement strategies to control and 
     mitigate the spread of invasive species through a voluntary 
     and incentive-based financial assistance grant program;
       (3) establishing a rapid response capability to combat 
     incipient invasive species invasions; and
       (4) modifying the requirements applicable to the National 
     Invasive Species Council.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Control.--The term ``control'' means--
       (A) eradicating, suppressing, reducing, or managing 
     invasive species in areas in which the species are present;
       (B) taking steps to detect early infestations of invasive 
     species on Public land and adjacent land that is at risk of 
     being infested; and
       (C) restoring native ecosystems to reverse or reduce the 
     impacts of invasive species.
       (2) Council.--The term ``Council'' means the National 
     Invasive Species Council established by section 3 of 
     Executive Order No. 13112 (64 Fed. Reg. 6184).
       (3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (4) Invasive species.--The term ``invasive species'' means, 
     with respect to a particular ecosystem, any animal, plant, or 
     other organism (including biological material of the animal, 
     plant, or other organism that is capable of propagating the 
     species)--
       (A) that is not native to the ecosystem; and
       (B) the introduction of which causes or is likely to cause 
     economic harm, environmental harm, or harm to human health.
       (5) National management plan.--The term ``National 
     Management Plan'' means the management plan referred to in 
     section 5 of Executive Order No. 13112 (64 Fed. Reg. 6185) 
     and entitled ``Meeting the Invasive Species Challenge''.
       (6) Public land.--The term ``Public land'' means all land 
     and water that is--
       (A) owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the United 
     States; and
       (B) administered by the Department of the Interior or the 
     Forest Service.
       (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (8) State.--The term ``State'' means--
       (A) a State of the United States;
       (B) the District of Columbia;
       (C) the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern 
     Mariana Islands;
       (D) the Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin 
     Islands;
       (E) the Federated States of Micronesia;
       (F) the Republic of the Marshall Islands; and
       (G) the Republic of Palau.

     SEC. 4. NATIVE HERITAGE ASSESSMENT AND CONTROL GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Assessment Grants.--The Secretary may provide to a 
     State a grant to carry out an assessment project consistent 
     with relevant invasive species management plans of the State 
     to--
       (1) identify invasive species that occur in the State;
       (2) survey the extent of invasive species in the State;
       (3) assess the needs to restore, manage, or enhance native 
     ecosystems in the State;
       (4) identify priorities for actions to address those needs;
       (5) incorporate, as applicable, the guidelines of the 
     National Management Plan; and
       (6) identify methods to--
       (A) control or detect incipient infestations of invasive 
     species in the State; or
       (B) control or assess established populations of invasive 
     species in the State.
       (b) Control Grants.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may provide grants to 
     appropriate public or private entities and Indian tribes to 
     carry out, in partnership with a Federal agency, control 
     projects for the management or eradication of invasive 
     species on Public land or adjacent land that--
       (A) include plans for--
       (i) monitoring the project areas; and
       (ii) maintaining effective control of invasive species 
     after the completion of the projects, including through the 
     conduct of restoration activities;
       (B) in the case of a project on adjacent land, are carried 
     out with the consent of the owner of the adjacent land; and
       (C) provide public notice to, and conduct outreach 
     activities relating to the control projects in, communities 
     in which control projects are carried out.
       (2) Priority.--In prioritizing grants for control projects, 
     the Secretary shall consider--
       (A) the extent to which a project would address--
       (i) the priorities of a State for invasive species control; 
     and
       (ii) the priorities for invasive species management on 
     Public land, such as the priorities for management on 
     National Park System and National Forest System land;
       (B) the estimated number of, or extent of infestation by, 
     invasive species in the State;
       (C) whether a project would encourage increased 
     coordination and cooperation among 1 or more Federal agencies 
     and State or local government agencies to control invasive 
     species;
       (D) whether a project--
       (i) fosters public-private partnerships; and
       (ii) uses Federal resources to encourage increased private 
     sector involvement, including the provision of private funds 
     or in-kind contributions;
       (E) the extent to which a project would aid the 
     conservation of species included on Federal or State lists of 
     threatened or endangered species;
       (F) whether a project includes pilot testing or a 
     demonstration of an innovative technology that has the 
     potential to improve the cost-effectiveness of controlling 
     invasive species; and
       (G) the extent to which a project--
       (i) considers the potential for unintended consequences of 
     control methods on native species; and
       (ii) includes contingency measures to address the 
     unintended consequences.
       (c) Duties of the Secretary.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) not later than 180 days after the date on which funds 
     are made available to carry out this Act, publish guidelines 
     and solicit applications for grants under this section;
       (2) not later than 1 year after the date on which funds are 
     made available to carry out this Act, evaluate and approve or 
     disapprove applications for grants submitted under this 
     section;
       (3) consult with the Council on--
       (A) any projects proposed for grants under this section, 
     including the priority of proposed projects for the grants; 
     and
       (B) providing a definition of the term ``adjacent land'' 
     for purposes of the control grant program under subsection 
     (b);
       (4) consult with the advisory committee established under 
     section 3(b) of Executive Order No. 13112 (64 Fed. Reg. 6184) 
     on projects proposed for a grant under this section, 
     including the scientific merit, technical merit, and 
     feasibility of a proposed project; and
       (5) if a project is conducted on National Forest System 
     land, consult with the Secretary of Agriculture.
       (d) Grant Duration.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), a 
     grant under this section shall provide funding for the 
     Federal share of the cost of a project for not more than 2 
     fiscal years.
       (2) Renewal of control projects.--
       (A) In general.--If the Secretary, after reviewing the 
     reports submitted under subsection (f) with respect to a 
     control project,

[[Page 18997]]

     finds that the project is making satisfactory progress, the 
     Secretary may renew a grant under this section for an 
     additional 3 fiscal years.
       (B) Implementation of monitoring and maintenance plan.--The 
     Secretary may renew a grant under this section to implement 
     the monitoring and maintenance plan required for a control 
     project under subsection (b) for not more than 10 years after 
     the project is otherwise complete.
       (e) Distribution of Control Grant Awards.--In making grants 
     for control projects under subsection (b), the Secretary 
     shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure that--
       (1) at least 50 percent of control project funds are spent 
     on land adjacent to Public land; and
       (2) there is a balance of smaller and larger control 
     projects conducted with grants under that subsection.
       (f) Reporting by Grant Recipient.--
       (1) Assessment projects.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date on which a grant is provided under subsection (a), a 
     grant recipient carrying out an assessment project shall 
     submit to the Secretary and the Governor of the State in 
     which the assessment project is carried out a report on the 
     assessment project.
       (2) Control projects.--A grant recipient carrying out a 
     control project under subsection (b) shall submit to the 
     Secretary--
       (A) an annual synopsis of the control project; and
       (B) a report on the control project not later than the 
     earlier of--
       (i) at least once every 2 years; or
       (ii) the date on which the grant expires.
       (3) Contents.--A report submitted under this subsection 
     shall include--
       (A) a detailed accounting of--
       (i) the funding made available for the project; and
       (ii) any expenditures made for the project; and
       (B) with respect to a control project--
       (i) a chronological list of any progress made with respect 
     to the project;
       (ii) specific information on the methods and techniques 
     used to control invasive species in the project area;
       (iii) trends in the population size and distribution of 
     invasive species in the project area; and
       (iv) the number of acres of the native ecosystem protected 
     or restored.
       (g) Cost-Sharing Requirement.--
       (1) Projects on adjacent land.--
       (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the Federal share of the cost of a control project carried 
     out on adjacent land shall be not more than 75 percent.
       (B) Certain control projects.--The Federal share of a 
     control project carried out on adjacent land that uses pilot 
     testing, demonstrates an innovative technology, or provides 
     for the conservation of threatened or endangered species 
     shall be 85 percent.
       (2) Projects on public land.--The Federal share of the cost 
     of the portion of a control project that is carried out on 
     Public land shall be 100 percent.
       (3) Application of in-kind contributions.--The Secretary 
     may apply to the non-Federal share of the costs of a control 
     project the fair market value of services or any other form 
     of in-kind contribution to the project made by a non-Federal 
     entity.
       (4) Derivation of non-federal share.--The non-Federal share 
     of the cost of a control project carried out with a grant 
     under this section may not be derived from a Federal grant 
     program or other Federal funds.
       (h) Reporting by Secretary.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act and every 2 years thereafter, the 
     Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that--
       (A) describes the implementation of this section; and
       (B) includes a determination whether the grants authorized 
     under subsections (a) and (b) should be expanded to land and 
     water that are owned and administered by Federal agencies 
     other than the Department of the Interior or the Forest 
     Service.
       (2) Contents.--A report under paragraph (1) shall include a 
     review of control projects, including--
       (A) a list of control projects selected, in progress, and 
     completed;
       (B) an assessment of project impacts, including--
       (i) areas treated; and
       (ii)(I) if feasible, a measurement of invasive species 
     eradicated; or
       (II) an estimate of the extent to which invasive species 
     have been reduced or contained;
       (C) the success and failure of control techniques used;
       (D) an accounting of expenditures by Federal, State, 
     regional, and local government agencies and other entities to 
     carry out the projects;
       (E) a review of efforts made to maintain an appropriate 
     database of projects assisted under this section; and
       (F) a review of the geographical distribution of Federal 
     funds, matching funds, and in-kind contributions provided for 
     projects.

     SEC. 5. RAPID RESPONSE ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may provide financial 
     assistance to States, local governments, public or private 
     entities, and Indian tribes for a period of 1 fiscal year to 
     enable States, local governments, nongovernmental entities, 
     and Indian tribes to rapidly respond to outbreaks of invasive 
     species that are at a stage at which rapid eradication or 
     control is possible.
       (b) Requirements for Assistance.--The Secretary shall--
       (1) at the request of the Governor of a State--
       (A) provide assistance under this section to the State, a 
     local government, public or private entity, or Indian tribe 
     for the eradication of an immediate invasive species threat 
     in the State if--
       (i) there is a demonstrated need for the assistance;
       (ii) the invasive species is considered to be an immediate 
     threat to native ecosystems, human health, or the economy, as 
     determined by the Secretary; and
       (iii) the proposed response of the State, local government, 
     public or private entity, or Indian tribe to the threat--

       (I) is technically feasible; and
       (II) minimizes adverse impacts to native ecosystems and 
     non-target species; or

       (B) if the requirements under subparagraph (A) are not met, 
     submit to the Governor of the State, not later than 30 days 
     after the date on which the Secretary received the request, 
     written notice that the State is not eligible for assistance 
     under this section;
       (2) determine the amount of financial assistance to be 
     provided under this section, subject to the availability of 
     appropriations, with respect to an outbreak of an invasive 
     species;
       (3) require that entities receiving assistance under this 
     section monitor and report on activities carried out with 
     such assistance in the same manner that control project grant 
     recipients monitor and report on such activities; and
       (4) expedite environmental and regulatory reviews to ensure 
     that an outbreak of invasive species can be addressed within 
     the 180-day period beginning on the date on which the State 
     notifies the Secretary of the outbreak.

     SEC. 6. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER AUTHORITIES.

       Nothing in this Act affects authorities, responsibilities, 
     obligations, or powers of the Secretary under any other 
     statute.

     SEC. 7. BUDGET CROSSCUT.

       Not later than March 31, 2006, and each year thereafter, 
     the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in 
     consultation with the Council, shall submit to Congress--
       (1) a comprehensive budget analysis and summary of Federal 
     programs relating to invasive species; and
       (2) a list of general priorities, ranked in high, medium, 
     and low categories, of Federal efforts and programs in--
       (A) prevention;
       (B) early detection and rapid response;
       (C) eradication, control, management, and restoration;
       (D) research and monitoring;
       (E) information management; and
       (F) public outreach and partnership efforts.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Assessment Grants.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary to carry out assessment 
     projects under section 4(a)--
       (1) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (2) such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 
     2007 through 2010.
       (b) Control Grants.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary to carry out control projects 
     under section 4(b)--
       (1) $175,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (2) such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 
     2007 through 2010.
       (c) Rapid Response Assistance.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary to carry out section 5--
       (1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
       (2) such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 
     2007 through 2010.
       (d) Continuing Availability.--Amounts made available under 
     this section shall remain available until expended.
       (e) Administrative Expenses of Secretary.--Of amounts made 
     available each fiscal year to carry out this Act, the 
     Secretary may expend not more than 5 percent to pay the 
     administrative expenses necessary to carry out this Act.
                                  ____

                                        The National Environmental


                                Coalition on Invasive Species,

                                                    July 22, 2005.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: The member organizations of the 
     National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species are 
     writing in support of the Pubic Land Protection and 
     Conservation Act of 2005.
       Separately, our individual organizations have protested 
     millions of acres of land; worked with thousands of corporate 
     partners, affiliates, and community groups; and provided 
     scientific, economic, and legal analyses that advocate 
     responsible policy solutions to the international, national, 
     and local level.
       Together, our organizations have over six million 
     individual members and supporters. The threat that invasive 
     species pose to our environment and economy and our interest

[[Page 18998]]

     in finding equitable, practical, and cost-effective solutions 
     to this environmental problem unites us in this Coalition.
       Invasive species that choke out, devour, and destroy native 
     wildlife and their habitat have infested more than 100 
     million acres of the American landscape. An additional three 
     million acres are lost each year to invasive weeds--an area 
     equal to a strip of land two miles wide stretching from coast 
     to coat. Invasive species are one of the most critical 
     threats to America's natural diversity and pose clear risks 
     to the nation's waters, forests, farmlands, rangelands, 
     wetlands, natural area, and public and private property 
     values. Experts estimates that these fast moving invaders are 
     already causing $130 billion of damage each year to the 
     economy.
       The Public Land Protection and Conservation Act of 2005 is 
     one of the best legislative proposals to date to deal with 
     the growing threat that invasive species pose to our nation's 
     ecological and economic health. We applaud this effort to use 
     federal funding as an incentive to encourage local government 
     agencies, private organizations, and individuals to be more 
     proactive in managing invasive and invading species. The 
     Native Heritage Control Grant Program offered in the bill is 
     noteworthy not only in that it provides such incentives, but 
     also in that it provides additional encouragement for 
     innovative technologies and work to benefit endangered 
     species. The Control Grant Program is aptly tailored to 
     encourage partnerships and work on federal and non-federal 
     land. Invasive species do not respect administrative or 
     political boundaries and we cannot hope to protect the best 
     federal lands without the cooperation of neighboring 
     landowners. Similarly helping private landowners and local 
     governments deal with their invasive species problems is also 
     extremely important, as recognized in this bill.
       The Public Land Protection and Conservation Act of 2005 
     reflects some of the latest scientific conclusions on 
     invasive species--we strongly support your esblishment of 
     `rapid response' funding to deal with incipient invasions. 
     There is broad consensus among organizations, scientists, and 
     state and federal agencies that eradicating invaders before 
     they become widely established is second only to prevention 
     as the most cost-effective and ultimately successful way to 
     stop invasions. This rapid response program will be critical 
     if the brown tree snake) Boiga irregularis) ever reaches 
     Hawaii from Guam, if the European green crab (Carcinus 
     maenas) ever reaches Alaska from California, or countless 
     other potential invasions occur on our coasts, inland 
     rangelands, grasslands, wetland, and waterways.
       The Public Land Protection and Conservation Act of 2005 
     contains useful deadlines and guidance to help ensure that 
     Assessment Grants, Rapid Response Assistance, and Control 
     Grants are delivered effectively, translating into meaningful 
     conservation results on the ground. The Coalition strongly 
     supports the inclusion of this language, which will help get 
     these programs up and running quickly, and help ensure quick 
     success against rapidly spreading problems. As this bill 
     recognizes, it is particularly important for Rapid Response 
     Assistance to be delivered as quickly as possible after a 
     state requests such assistance, because time is of the 
     essence to prevent new invaders from getting a foothold 
     within a state.
       The National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species 
     supports this proposed legislation as now written. The grant 
     programs it establishes are sorely needed to address the 
     widespread damage being caused by invasive species all across 
     America. We look forward to working with you and your staff 
     on this legislation that will help address America's dire 
     invasive species problem.
           Sincerely,
     Gaby Chavarria, Ph.D,
       Vice President for Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife.
     Peter T. Jenkins,
       Attorney/Policy Analyst, International Center for 
     Technology Assessment.
     Timothy male, Ph.D,
       Senior Ecologist, Environemtnal Defense.
     Mike Daulton,
       Assistant Director, National Audubon Society.
     Adam Kolotn,
       Director, Congressional & Federal Affairs, National 
     Wildlife Federation.
     Phyllis N. Windle, Ph.D,
       Senior Scientist, Union of Concerned Scientists.
     John M. Randall,
       Director, Invasive Species Initiative, The Nature 
     Conservancy.
                                  ____

                                                    June 14, 2004.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: The Conservation Council of Hawaii 
     commends you for introducing the Public Land Protection and 
     Conservation Act of 2004. This bill will be instrumental in 
     preventing the invasion of new invasive species, and help 
     prevent the spread of invasives that have already taken root 
     in the United States.
       In Hawaii, we know first hand that invasive species choke 
     out, devour, and destroy native wildlife and their habitat. 
     Throughout the nation, invasive species have infested more 
     than 100 million acres of the American landscape and an 
     additional three million acres are lost each year to invasive 
     weeds. Invasive species are one of the most critical threats 
     to America's natural diversity and pose clear risks to the 
     nation's waters, forests, farmlands, rangelands, wetlands, 
     natural areas, and public and private property values. 
     Experts estimate that these fast moving invaders are already 
     causing $130 billion of damage each year to the economy and 
     are the second leading cause, after habitat loss, for 
     wildlife being listed as threatened and endangered.
       The Public Land Protection and Conservation Act of 2004 is 
     one of the best legislative proposals to date to deal with 
     the growing threat that invasive species pose to our nation's 
     ecological and economic health. We applaud this effort to use 
     federal funding as an incentive to encourage local government 
     agencies, private organizations, and individuals to be more 
     proactive in managing invasive and invading species. The 
     Native Heritage Control Grant Program offered in the bill is 
     noteworthy not only in that it provides such incentives, but 
     also in that it provides additional encouragement for 
     innovative technologies and work to benefit endangered 
     species. The Control Grant Program is aptly tailored to 
     encourage partnerships and work on federal and non-federal 
     land. Invasive species do not respect administrative or 
     political boundaries and we cannot hope to protect the best 
     federal lands without the cooperation of neighboring 
     landowners. Similarly, helping private landowners and local 
     governments deal with their invasive species problems is also 
     extremely important, as recognized in this bill.
       The Public Land Protection and Conservation Act of 2004 
     reflects some of the latest scientific conclusions on 
     invasive species--we strongly support your establishment of 
     `rapid response' funding to deal with incipient invasions. 
     There is broad consensus among organizations, scientists, and 
     state and federal agencies that eradicating invaders before 
     they become widely established is second only to prevention 
     as the most cost-effective and ultimately successful way to 
     stop invasions. This rapid response program will be critical 
     if the brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis) ever reaches 
     Hawaii from Guam, if the European green crab (Carcinus 
     maenas) ever reaches Alaska from California, or countless 
     other potential invasions occur on our coasts, inland 
     rangelands, grasslands, wetlands, and waterways.
       The Conservation Council of Hawaii strongly supports this 
     proposed legislation. We look forward to working with you and 
     your staff on this legislation to ensure its successful 
     passage.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Marjorie Ziegler,
     President, Conservation Council of Hawaii.
                                  ____

         State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural 
           Resources,
                                     Honolulu, HI, April 22, 2004.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     Prince Kuhio Federal Building,
     Honolulu, HI.
       Dear Senator Akaka: I would like to thank you and 
     acknowledge the State of Hawaii's support for the Public Land 
     Conservation Act of 2004. We feel this legislation will 
     achieve its stated purpose of encouraging Federal, State, 
     local and nongovernmental partnerships to assess and control 
     invasive species on Federal and adjacent lands.
       I believe that Hawaii is the best state model for 
     developing strategies for federal agencies, not only to work 
     together more effectively, but also to work in partnership 
     with state and local government entities. Increasing success 
     in invasive species projects in Hawaii has come largely from 
     the formation of strong partnerships between State, County 
     and Federal agencies and private groups. Just as many 
     landowners and businesses are affected by the same invasive 
     species concerns, many agencies are responsible for the 
     pathways that bring potentially invasive species into Hawaii, 
     regulate their movement and control their spread.
       Partnerships to address invasive species issues have been 
     responsible for the greatest improvements in Hawaii's ability 
     to respond to recognized priority pests. In Hawaii, combining 
     limited resources, authority, and expertise has led to the 
     creation of Invasive Species Committees that carry out on the 
     ground actions, the Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species 
     that has allowed agency staff to develop integrated policies 
     within the state and most recently the Hawaii Invasive 
     Species Council composed of State agency heads.
       Implementation of current management plans developed by 
     coordinated efforts of relevant public agencies and affected 
     local constituents in Hawaii can help build the framework to 
     begin or enhance larger-scale regional strategies to combat 
     wide-ranging

[[Page 18999]]

     invasive species. Federal investments to support local, 
     State, and regional partners who are prepared to take action 
     now against known priority invasive species will provide 
     valuable lessons for other regions and promote innovation and 
     efficiency in protection and public outreach strategies. By 
     promoting their progress, these partnerships will in turn 
     help identify the policy and legal obstacles to success as 
     well as build a constituency for more effective invasive-
     species prevention and control programs in other areas.
       Please let me know of any way that we can help support this 
     important piece of legislation. Mahalo.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Peter T. Young,
                                                       Chairperson
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein):
  II S. 1545. A bill to withdraw the Los Padres National Forest in 
California from location, entry, and patent under mining laws, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation today that 
would ban additional oil and gas drilling in the Los Padres National 
Forest. My colleague from California, Senator Feinstein, joins me in 
this effort. Representative Capps introduced companion legislation in 
the House of Representatives earlier this month.
  Los Padres National Forest is on California's central coast, 
stretching from Monterey County's Big Sur down to Ventura and the 
western edge of Los Angeles County. Covering almost 1.75 million acres, 
it is California's third-largest national forest and one of the State's 
most visited. Los Padres National Forest is an ecological treasure and 
a recreational refuge in one of California's, indeed America's, most 
densely populated areas.
  It provides habitat for 20 threatened and endangered wildlife 
species, including the spectacular California condor. Los Padres also 
contains unexplored archaeological sites that contain Native American 
historical artifacts.
  Yet, despite these facts and strong local opposition to oil and gas 
drilling in the Forest, the Forest Service announced today that it will 
open up more than 52,000 acres of land to oil and gas drilling in Los 
Padres National Forest. While this is far less land than the Forest 
Service previously considered opening, additional drilling is simply 
unacceptable. That is why I am introducing legislation to prevent this 
new drilling, and any future drilling from occurring in Los Padres 
National Forest.
  Additional oil and gas drilling will threaten the pristine and 
unspoiled lands in the Forest. It could damage or destroy Native 
American artifacts. And, it could ruin recreational opportunities by 
contaminating streams and increasing air pollution.
  My legislation is a critical step toward protecting the irreplaceable 
natural, cultural, and recreational resources of the Los Padres 
National Forest. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 1548. A bill to provide for the conveyance of certain Forest 
Service land to the city of Coffman Cove, Alaska; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I introduce a bill that is very 
important to a small community in my home State of Alaska. This bill 
will authorize the U.S. Forest Service to convey approximately 12 acres 
of land, which it no longer needs but continues to own in Coffman Cove, 
AK to the city of Coffman Cove. The bill authorizes that the land, a 
former administrative site, be conveyed without charge to the city 
which has a population of about 230 people.
  Coffman Cove was founded in 1965 as a logging community to provide 
support for the timber industry on Prince of Wales Island in the 
Tongass National Forest. It operated for almost 35 years in that 
capacity. Due to changes in Federal policy, the timber industry on the 
island no longer provides the economic base necessary to sustain 
Coffman Cove. Attempts at economic diversification are very difficult 
so long as the Forest Service holds in Federal ownership these 12 acres 
which literally occupy the center of this small community.
  Just a few years ago, the Forest Service in conjunction with the 
timber industry completed the environmental cleanup of the logging site 
and facility at Coffman Cove. That cleanup was funded by the timber 
industry as good corporate citizens. The result of the cleanup is that 
the 12 acres can now be made available for disposal to the city.
  This bill, in which I am joined by my colleague Mr. Stevens, would 
convey title to the City without cost so that it can begin a 
redevelopment plan for the community. The city of Coffman Cove needs 
this land if it is to hope to reorient its economy from a principally 
logging community to a more diversified economic community. A small 
town of 230 people simply does not have the funds to purchase this land 
and the Federal Government needs to pitch in by conveying full title 
without cost to the community.
  This is only fair since the Federal Government's change in timber 
policy has created the city's dilemma. As a result of the change in 
timber policy with which the Senate is so familiar, the city has been 
set adrift to fend for itself economically. And it has done a good job. 
It will soon become the southern terminus for the Inter-Island Ferry 
Authority's new northern route which will connect Prince of Wales 
Island with Wrangell and Petersburg. The new route will go into service 
in the next few months and this should provide an economic boost to the 
community.
  But, Coffman Cove must control the land in the heart of its community 
if it is to economically diversify. For the new ferry route to bring 
economic development to the City, the City must able to sell, rent, or 
develop its local land base. The 12 acres which are the subject of my 
bill are the 12 key acres right in the center of town. Now this is a 
small town and without control of this land, the City cannot ever 
successfully diversity and recovers from the change in its economy as a 
result of the change in Federal timber policy.
  This Forest Service desires to retain a 3 acre site for its continued 
administrative purposes. My bill does not affect that site and I expect 
the Forest Service to have no problem with the land conveyance 
locations provided in this bill. I appreciate the assistance of the 
Forest Service in helping me to draft the legislation.
  This conveyance fulfills the Federal Government's commitment that 
changes in Federal timber policy would be matched by Federal help to 
the local communities to diversify. It is absolutely appropriate and 
fair to offer Coffman Cove this former Forest Service administrative 
site that no longer has value to the Federal government but that is 
crucial to Coffman Cove as it plans its future.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1548

       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 ``Coffman Cove Administrative 
     Site Conveyance Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the community of Coffman Cove, Alaska, which originated 
     as a logging camp in the 1960's, was incorporated as a city 
     in 1989;
       (2) the Forest Service property located in the center of 
     the City was used by the Forest Service as a work center;
       (3) the Forest Service work facilities included part of the 
     logging camp, a log sort yard, and a log transfer site, all 
     of which supported the long-term timber sale operations and 
     other subsequent timber sales in the Tongass National Forest;
       (4) as the long-term timber sale operations concluded, the 
     need for the Forest Service to use the Forest Service site in 
     Coffman Cove diminished;
       (5) the Forest Service work center facilities that 
     supported timber operations have been removed and the site 
     has been restored;
       (6) the location of the administrative site interferes with 
     the ability of the City to further develop commercial 
     operations and tourism support facilities relating to a new 
     ferry terminal;

[[Page 19000]]

       (7) the City wants to acquire a portion of the site to 
     continue the transition of the City from a timber-dependent 
     economy to a more fully developed and diversified economy; 
     and
       (8) the Forest Service expects that only approximately 3 
     acres of the administrative site will be used in the future 
     for National Forest System purposes.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) City.--The term ``City'' means the city of Coffman 
     Cove, Alaska.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.

     SEC. 4. CONVEYANCE.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary shall convey to the City, without 
     consideration and without additional warrants or liability on 
     behalf of the United States, fee simple title to the parcel 
     of Forest Service land described in subsection (b).
       (b) Description of Land.--
       (1) In general.--The parcel of Forest Service land referred 
     to in subsection (a) is the approximately 12 acres of land 
     identified in U.S. Survey 10099, as depicted on the plat 
     entitled ``Subdivision of U.S. Survey No. 10099'' and 
     recorded as Plat 2003-1 on January 21, 2003, Petersburg 
     Recording District, Alaska.
       (2) Excluded land.--The parcel of Forest Service land 
     conveyed under subsection (a) does not include the portion of 
     U.S. Survey 10099 that is north of the right-of-way for 
     Forest Development Road 3030-295 and southeast of Tract CC-8.
       (c) Right-of-way.--The United States may reserve a right-
     of-way to provide access to the Forest Service land excluded 
     from the conveyance to the City under subsection (b)(2).

                          ____________________