[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7923-7953]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CONRAD:
  S. 911. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide for reimbursement of certified midwife services and to provide 
for more equitable reimbursement rates for certified nurse-midwife 
services; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Improving 
Access to Nurse-Midwifery Care Act of 2005. For too many years, 
certified nurse midwives, CNMs, have not received adequate 
reimbursement under the Medicare program, despite evidence that shows 
the quality of care and outcomes for services provided by CNMs are 
comparable to obstetricians and gynecologists. My legislation takes 
important steps to improve reimbursement for these important healthcare 
providers.
  There are approximately three million disabled women on Medicare who 
are of childbearing age; however, if they choose to utilize a CNM for 
``well women'' services, the CNM is only reimbursed at 65 percent of 
the physician fee schedule. In practical terms, the typical well-woman 
visit costs, on average, $50. But Medicare currently reimburses CNMs in 
rural areas only $14 for this visit, which could include a pap smear, 
mammogram, and other pre-cancer screenings. CNMs administer the same 
tests and incur the same costs as physicians but receive only 65 
percent of the physician fee schedule for these services. This reduced 
payment is unfair and does not adequately reflect the services CNMs 
provide to beneficiaries. At this incredibly low rate of reimbursement, 
the Medicare Payment Advisory Committee, MedPAC, agrees that a CNM 
simply cannot afford to provide services to Medicare patients and has 
supported increasing reimbursement for CNMs.
  My legislation would make several changes to improve the ability of 
CNMs and certified midwives, CMs, to effectively serve the Medicare-
eligible population. First, and most importantly, my bill recognizes 
the need to increase Medicare reimbursement for CNMs by raising the 
reimbursement level from 65 percent to 100 percent of the physician fee 
schedule. CNMs provide the same care as physicians; therefore, it is 
only fair to reimburse CNMs at the same level.
  In addition, the Improving Access to Nurse-Midwifery Care Act would 
guarantee payment for graduate medical education and includes technical 
corrections that will clarify the reassignment of billing rights for 
CNMs who are employed by others. Finally, my bill would establish 
recognition for a certified midwife, CM, to provide services under 
Medicare. Despite the fact that CNMs and CMs provide the same services, 
Medicare has yet to recognize CMs as eligible providers. My bill would 
change this.
  This bill will enhance access to ``well woman'' care for thousands of 
women in underserved communities and make several needed changes to 
improve access to midwives. I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
        Kerry, Mr. Jeffords, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Schumer, and 
        Mr. Durbin):
  S. 912. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
clarify the jurisdiction of the United States over waters of the United 
States; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing important 
legislation to affirm Federal jurisdiction over the waters of the 
United States. I am pleased to have three members of the Environment 
and Public Works Committee--the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Jeffords, the 
Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, the Senator from California, 
Mrs. Boxer--as original cosponsors of this bill. I also thank Senators 
Dayton, Kerry, Schumer, and Durbin for joining me in introducing this 
important legislation.
  In the U.S. Supreme Court's January 2001 decision, Solid Waste Agency 
of Northern Cook County versus the Army Corps of Engineers, a 5 to 4 
majority limited the authority of Federal agencies to use the so-called 
migratory bird rule as the basis for asserting Clean Water Act 
jurisdiction over non- navigable, intrastate, isolated wetlands, 
streams, ponds, and other bodies of water.
  This decision, known as the SWANCC decision, means that the 
Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers can no 
longer enforce Federal Clean Water Act protection mechanisms to protect 
a waterway solely on the basis that it is used as habitat for migratory 
birds.
  In its discussion of the case, the Court went beyond the issue of the 
migratory bird rule and questioned whether Congress intended the Clean 
Water Act to provide protection for isolated ponds, streams, wetlands 
and other waters, as it had been interpreted to provide for most of the 
last 30 years. While not the legal holding of the case, the Court's 
discussion has resulted in a wide variety of interpretations by EPA and 
Corps officials that jeopardize protection for wetlands, and other 
waters. The wetlands at risk include prairie potholes and bogs, 
familiar to many in Wisconsin, and many other types of wetlands.
  In effect, the Court's decision removed much of the Clean Water Act 
protection for between 30 percent to 60 percent of the Nation's 
wetlands. An estimated 60 percent of the wetlands in my home State of 
Wisconsin lost Federal protection. Wisconsin is not alone. The National 
Association of State Wetland Managers has been collecting data from 
States across the country. For example, Nebraska estimates that it will 
lose protection for more than 40 percent of its wetlands. Indiana 
estimates it will lose 31 percent of total wetland acreage and 74 
percent of the total number of wetlands. Delaware estimates the loss of 
protection for 33 percent or more of its freshwater wetlands.
  These wetlands absorb floodwaters, prevent pollution from reaching 
our rivers and streams, and provide crucial habitat for most of the 
Nation's ducks and other waterfowl, as well as hundreds of other bird, 
fish, shellfish and amphibian species. Loss of these waters would have 
a devastating effect on our environment.
  In addition, by narrowing the water and wetland areas subject to 
federal regulation, the decision also shifts more of the economic 
burden for regulating wetlands to state and local governments. My home 
State of Wisconsin has passed legislation to assume the regulation of 
isolated waters, but many other States have not. This patchwork of 
regulation means that the standards for protection of wetlands 
nationwide are unclear and confusing, jeopardizing the migratory birds 
and other wildlife that depend on these wetlands.
  Since 2001, the confusion over the interpretation of the SWANCC 
decision has grown. On January 15, 2003, the EPA and Army Corps of 
Engineers published in the Federal Register an Advanced Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking

[[Page 7924]]

raising questions about the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. 
Simultaneously, they released a guidance memo to their field staff 
regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction.
  The agencies claim these actions are necessary because of the SWANCC 
case. But both the guidance memo and the proposed rulemaking go far 
beyond the holding in SWANCC. The guidance took effect right away and 
has had an immediate impact. It tells the Corps and EPA staff to stop 
asserting jurisdiction over isolated waters without first obtaining 
permission from headquarters. Based on this guidance, waters that the 
EPA and Corps judge to be outside the Clean Water Act can be filled, 
dredged, and polluted without a permit or any other long-standing Clean 
Water Act safeguard.
  The rulemaking announced the Administration's intention to consider 
even broader changes to Clean Water Act coverage for our waters. 
Specifically, the agencies are questioning whether there is any basis 
for asserting Clean Water Act jurisdiction over additional waters, like 
intermittent streams. The possibility for a redefinition of our waters 
is troubling because there is only one definition of the term ``water'' 
in the Clean Water Act. The wetlands program, the point source program 
which stops the dumping of pollution, and the non-point program 
governing polluted runoff all depend on this definition. Even though 
the Administration rescinded this proposed rulemaking in December 2003, 
the policy guidance remains in effect.
  If we don't protect a category of waters from being filled under the 
wetlands program, we also fail to protect them from having trash or raw 
sewage dumped in them, or having other activities that violate the 
Clean Water Act conducted in them as well.
  Congress needs to re-establish the common understanding of the Clean 
Water Act's jurisdiction to protect all waters of the U.S.--the 
understanding that Congress held when the Act was adopted in 1972--as 
reflected in the law, legislative history, and longstanding 
regulations, practice, and judicial interpretations prior to the SWANCC 
decision.
  The proposed legislation is very simple. It does three things. First, 
it adopts a statutory definition of ``waters of the United States'' 
based on a longstanding definition of waters in the EPA and Corps of 
Engineers' regulations. Second, it deletes the term ``navigable'' from 
the Act to clarify that Congress's primary concern in 1972 was to 
protect the nation's waters from pollution, rather than just sustain 
the navigability of waterways, and to reinforce that original intent. 
Finally, it includes a set of findings that explain the factual basis 
for Congress to assert its constitutional authority over waters and 
wetlands on all relevant constitutional grounds, including the Commerce 
Clause, the Property Clause, the Treaty Clause, and Necessary and 
Proper Clause.
  In conclusion, I am very pleased to have the support of so many 
environmental and conservation groups, as well as organizations that 
represent those who regulate and manage our country's wetlands, such 
as: the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, the National 
Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, American Rivers, the National Audubon 
Society, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Defenders of Wildlife, 
the Ocean Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, the Izaac Walton League, and 
the Association of State Floodplain Managers. They know, as I do, that 
we need to re-affirm the Federal Government's role in protecting our 
water. This legislation is a first step in doing just that.
  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. 912

       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 ``Clean Water Authority 
     Restoration Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are as follows:
       (1) To reaffirm the original intent of Congress in enacting 
     the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 
     (86 Stat. 816) to restore and maintain the chemical, 
     physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the 
     United States.
       (2) To clearly define the waters of the United States that 
     are subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
       (3) To provide protection to the waters of the United 
     States to the fullest extent of the legislative authority of 
     Congress under the Constitution.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Water is a unique and precious resource that is 
     necessary to sustain human life and the life of animals and 
     plants.
       (2) Water is used not only for human, animal, and plant 
     consumption, but is also important for agriculture, 
     transportation, flood control, energy production, recreation, 
     fishing and shellfishing, and municipal and commercial uses.
       (3) In enacting amendments to the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act in 1972 and through subsequent amendment, 
     including the Clean Water Act of 1977 (91 Stat. 1566) and the 
     Water Quality Act of 1987 (101 Stat. 7), Congress established 
     the national objective of restoring and maintaining the 
     chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of 
     the United States and recognized that achieving this 
     objective requires uniform, minimum national water quality 
     and aquatic ecosystem protection standards to restore and 
     maintain the natural structures and functions of the aquatic 
     ecosystems of the United States.
       (4) Water is transported through interconnected hydrologic 
     cycles, and the pollution, impairment, or destruction of any 
     part of an aquatic system may affect the chemical, physical, 
     and biological integrity of other parts of the aquatic 
     system.
       (5) Protection of intrastate waters, along with other 
     waters of the United States, is necessary to restore and 
     maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of 
     all waters in the United States.
       (6) The regulation of discharges of pollutants into 
     interstate and intrastate waters is an integral part of the 
     comprehensive clean water regulatory program of the United 
     States.
       (7) Small and periodically-flowing streams comprise the 
     majority of all stream channels in the United States and 
     serve critical biological and hydrological functions that 
     affect entire watersheds, including reducing the introduction 
     of pollutants to large streams and rivers, and especially 
     affecting the life cycles of aquatic organisms and the flow 
     of higher order streams during floods.
       (8) The pollution or other degradation of waters of the 
     United States, individually and in the aggregate, has a 
     substantial relation to and effect on interstate commerce.
       (9) Protection of the waters of the United States, 
     including intrastate waters, is necessary to prevent 
     significant harm to interstate commerce and sustain a robust 
     system of interstate commerce in the future.
       (10) Waters, including wetlands, provide protection from 
     flooding, and draining or filling wetlands and channelizing 
     or filling streams, including intrastate wetlands and 
     streams, can cause or exacerbate flooding, placing a 
     significant burden on interstate commerce.
       (11) Millions of people in the United States depend on 
     wetlands and other waters of the United States to filter 
     water and recharge surface and subsurface drinking water 
     supplies, protect human health, and create economic 
     opportunity.
       (12) Millions of people in the United States enjoy 
     recreational activities that depend on intrastate waters, 
     such as waterfowl hunting, bird watching, fishing, and 
     photography and other graphic arts, and those activities and 
     associated travel generate billions of dollars of income each 
     year for the travel, tourism, recreation, and sporting 
     sectors of the economy of the United States.
       (13) Activities that result in the discharge of pollutants 
     into waters of the United States are commercial or economic 
     in nature.
       (14) States have the responsibility and right to prevent, 
     reduce, and eliminate pollution of waters, and the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act respects the rights and 
     responsibilities of States by preserving for States the 
     ability to manage permitting, grant, and research programs to 
     prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution, and to establish 
     standards and programs more protective of a State's waters 
     than is provided under Federal standards and programs.
       (15) Protecting the quality of and regulating activities 
     affecting the waters of the United States is a necessary and 
     proper means of implementing treaties to which the United 
     States is a party, including treaties protecting species of 
     fish, birds, and wildlife.
       (16) Protecting the quality of and regulating activities 
     affecting the waters of the United States is a necessary and 
     proper means of protecting Federal land, including hundreds 
     of millions of acres of parkland, refuge land, and other land 
     under Federal ownership and the wide array of waters 
     encompassed by that land.
       (17) Protecting the quality of and regulating activities 
     affecting the waters of the

[[Page 7925]]

     United States is necessary to protect Federal land and waters 
     from discharges of pollutants and other forms of degradation.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

       Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1362) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (7);
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (23) as 
     paragraphs (7) through (22), respectively; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(23) Waters of the united states.--The term `waters of 
     the United States' means all waters subject to the ebb and 
     flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate 
     and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, 
     rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, 
     sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, 
     playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the 
     foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or 
     activities affecting these waters, are subject to the 
     legislative power of Congress under the Constitution.''.

     SEC. 5. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et 
     seq.) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``navigable waters of the United States'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``waters of the United 
     States'';
       (2) in section 304(l)(1) by striking ``navigable waters'' 
     in the heading and inserting ``waters of the united states''; 
     and
       (3) by striking ``navigable waters'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``waters of the United States''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 913. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to establish a 
university transportation center to be known as the ``Southwest Bridge 
Research Center''; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
creating the Bridge Research Center at New Mexico State University. I 
would also like to thank my good friend Senator Bingaman for 
cosponsoring this important bill.
  New Mexico State University (NMSU) is uniquely qualified to be the 
home of the Bridge Research Center. For over three decades NMSU has 
applied its considerable talents to solving technological problems 
related to bridge systems. It makes sense that we capitalize on NMSU's 
history and expertise in this field by establishing the bridge research 
center.
  The Bridge Research Center will develop smart bridge evaluation 
techniques using advanced sensors and instrumentation. Additionally, 
the NMSU Bridge Center will improve bridge design methodologies, create 
new inspection techniques for bridges, and find better ways to conduct 
nondestructive evaluation and testing. Finally, the Bridge Center will 
conduct research into high performance materials to address durability 
and retrofit needs.
  I have no doubt that NMSU will apply its extensive capability to 
develop theoretical concepts into practical solutions for bridge 
problems all across our country.
  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. 913

       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 ``Southwest Bridge Research 
     Center Establishment Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. BRIDGE RESEARCH CENTER.

       Section 5505 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(k) Southwest Bridge Research Center.--
       ``(1) In general.--In addition to the university 
     transportation centers receiving grants under subsections (a) 
     and (b), the Secretary shall provide grants to New Mexico 
     State University, in collaboration with the Oklahoma 
     Transportation Center, to establish and operate a university 
     transportation center to be known as the `Southwest Bridge 
     Research Center' (referred to in this subsection as the 
     `Center').
       ``(2) Purpose.--The purpose of the Center shall be to 
     contribute at a national level to a systems approach to 
     improving the overall performance of bridges, with an 
     emphasis on--
       ``(A) increasing the number of highly skilled individuals 
     entering the field of transportation;
       ``(B) improving the monitoring of structural health over 
     the life of bridges;
       ``(C) developing innovative technologies for bridge testing 
     and assessment;
       ``(D) developing technologies and procedures for ensuring 
     bridge safety, reliability, and security; and
       ``(E) providing training in the methods for bridge 
     inspection and evaluation.
       ``(3) Objectives.--The Center shall carry out--
       ``(A) basic and applied research, the products of which 
     shall be judged by peers or other experts in the field to 
     advance the body of knowledge in transportation;
       ``(B) an education program that includes multidisciplinary 
     course work and participation in research; and
       ``(C) Aa ongoing program of technology transfer that makes 
     research results available to potential users in a form that 
     can be implemented.
       ``(4) Maintenance of effort.--To be eligible to receive a 
     grant under this subsection, the institution specified in 
     paragraph (1) shall enter into an agreement with the 
     Secretary to ensure that, for each fiscal year after 
     establishment of the Center, the institution will fund 
     research activities relating to transportation in an amount 
     that is at least equal to the average annual amount of funds 
     expended for the activities for the 2 fiscal years preceding 
     the fiscal year in which the grant is received.
       ``(5) Cost sharing.--
       ``(A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of any 
     activity carried out using funds from a grant provided under 
     this subsection shall be 50 percent.
       ``(B) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of any activity carried out using funds from a grant provided 
     under this subsection may include funds provided to the 
     recipient under any of sections 503, 504(b), and 505 of title 
     23.
       ``(C) Ongoing programs.--After establishment of the Center, 
     the institution specified in paragraph (1) shall obligate for 
     each fiscal year not less than $200,000 in regularly budgeted 
     institutional funds to support ongoing transportation 
     research and education programs.
       ``(6) Program coordination.--
       ``(A) Coordination.--The Secretary shall--
       ``(i) coordinate the research, education, training, and 
     technology transfer activities carried out by the Center;
       ``(ii) disseminate the results of that research; and
       ``(iii) establish and operate a clearinghouse for 
     information derived from that research.
       ``(B) Annual review and evaluation.--At least annually, and 
     in accordance with the plan developed under section 508 of 
     title 23, the Secretary shall review and evaluate each 
     program carried out by the Center using funds from a grant 
     provided under this subsection.
       ``(7) Limitation on availability of funds.--Funds made 
     available to carry out this subsection shall remain available 
     for obligation for a period of 2 years after the last day of 
     the fiscal year for which the funds are authorized.
       ``(8) Amount of grant.--For each of fiscal years 2005 
     through 2010, the Secretary shall provide a grant in the 
     amount of $3,000,000 to the institution specified in 
     paragraph (1) to carry out this subsection.
       ``(9) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than 
     the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this subsection 
     $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010.''.

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague 
Senator Domenici today to introduce legislation that I believe will go 
a long way in helping to improve the safety and durability of the 
Nation's highway bridges. It is with great pleasure we are today 
introducing the New Mexico State University Bridge Research Center 
Establishment Act of 2005.
  The purpose of our bill is to authorize the Secretary of 
Transportation to establish a new University Transportation Center 
focused on the safety of highway bridges. The new center will lead the 
Nation in the research and development of technologies for bridge 
testing and monitoring, procedures for ensuring bridge safety and 
security, and training in methods of bridge inspection. New Mexico 
State University is one of the Nation's leaders in bridge research and 
I believe worthy of being designated as one of the Nation's university 
transportation centers.
  Our highway network is a central component of our economy and 
fundamental to our freedom and quality of life. America's mobility is 
the engine of our free market system. Transportation via cars, buses, 
and trucks plays a central role in our basic quality of life. Much of 
the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the materials for our homes and 
offices, comes to us over the 4 million miles of our road network.

[[Page 7926]]

  One critical element of our highway network is the highway bridges 
that span streams, rivers, and canyons of our cities and rural areas. 
Bridges also help traffic flow smoothly by carrying one road over 
another.
  Most highway bridges are easy to overlook. Notable exceptions are New 
England's covered bridges, the new Zakim Charles River Bridge in 
Boston, San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge, and the spectacular Rio 
Grande Gorge Bridge near Taos, NM. The fact is, according to the 
Federal Highway Administration, we have about 590,000 highway bridges 
in this country that are more than 20-feet long. The total bridge-deck 
area of these 590,000 bridges is an amazing 120 square miles, or 
slightly smaller in area than the entire city limits of Albuquerque, 
NM, roughly twice the size of the entire District of Columbia, or five 
times the area of New York's Manhattan Island. The State of Texas leads 
the Nation with almost 49,000 bridges, about ten percent of the total. 
Ohio is second with about 28,000 highway bridges.
  A little known and disturbing fact about these 590,000 highway 
bridges is that nearly 78,000, or 13 percent, are considered to be 
structurally deficient according to the most recent statistics from the 
FHWA. The percent of structurally deficient bridges varies widely among 
the 50 states. For example, this chart shows the top ten states with 
the highest percentage of deficient bridges.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                      Percent of structurally deficient bridges
                            State                                          Number of bridges               Number of structurally deficient bridges                   (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oklahoma.....................................................                                     23,312                                      7,307                                         31.3
Rhode Island.................................................                                        749                                        193                                         25.8
Pennsylvania.................................................                                     22,253                                      5,464                                         24.6
Missouri.....................................................                                     23,791                                      5,028                                         21.1
Iowa.........................................................                                     24,902                                      5,259                                         21.1
Mississippi..................................................                                     16,838                                      3,379                                         20.1
Vermont......................................................                                      2,690                                        484                                         18.0
South Dakota.................................................                                      5,961                                      1,072                                         18.0
North Dakota.................................................                                      4,507                                        803                                         17.8
Nebraska.....................................................                                     15,455                                      2,550                                         16.5
Michigan.....................................................                                     10,818                                      1,764                                         16.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The source is the FHWA National Bridge Inventory System, December 2004

  Florida and Arizona have the lowest percentages of structurally 
deficient bridges at less than 3 percent each.
  Structurally deficient bridges are a particular concern in rural 
areas of our country. According to FHWA's 2002 edition of its 
Conditions and Performance Report to Congress, 16 percent or rural 
bridges are structurally deficient compared to only 10 percent of urban 
bridges. The report estimates the average costs required to maintain 
the existing 590,000 highway bridges is $7.3 billion per year.
  Another surprising fact about our Nation's highway bridges is their 
age. Almost one-third of all highway bridges are more than 50 years 
old, and over 10,000 bridges are at least 100 years old. About 4,200 of 
these century-old bridges are currently rated as structurally 
deficient.
  I do believe the number of deficient bridges in this country should 
be a concern to all Senators. Ensuring that States and local 
communities have the funds they need to help correct these deficient 
bridges will be one of my priorities when Congress reauthorizes TEA-21. 
However, because there may not be sufficient Federal and State funding 
to address all of the deficient bridges, it will be important to 
identify the bridges that are most in need of replacement or 
rehabilitation.
  To ensure the most efficient use of limited resources, Congress 
should also address the need for new technologies to help States 
monitor the condition of the Nation's 590,000 highway bridges and 
determine priorities for repair or replacement. Such monitoring 
technologies, or ``smart bridges,'' should be quick, efficient, and not 
damage the bridge in any way. I am very pleased that New Mexico State 
University is one of the Nation's pioneers in the development of non-
destructive methods of determining the physical condition of highway 
bridges. Such smart bridges can record and transmit information on 
their current structural condition as well as on the traffic crossing 
them. Sensors embedded in the concrete monitor the stresses on the 
bridge as the weather changes or under the weight of vehicles and show 
how the materials change with age. The information can then be used by 
engineers to help design more durable and economical bridges. 
Eventually NMSU's methods could be used to help design better 
buildings.
  In 1998, NMSU installed 67 fiber-optic sensors on an existing steel 
bridge on Interstate 10 in Las Cruces and converted it into a ``smart 
bridge.'' This award-winning project was the first application of 
fiber-optic sensors to highway bridges. In 2000, sensors were 
incorporated directly in a concrete bridge during construction to 
monitor the curing of the concrete; the bridge crosses the Rio Puerco 
on Interstate 40, west of Albuquerque. A third smart bridge, on I10 
over University Avenue in Las Cruces, opened in July 2004.
  In February 2003 I had an opportunity to tour the facilities at NMSU 
and to see firsthand the fine facilities and work being conducted on 
bridge technology. NMSU has an actual 40-foot ``bridge'' in a 
laboratory on campus to allow studies of instrumentation and data 
collection.
  I will ask unanimous consent that two recent articles describing 
NMSU's accomplishments on smart bridge technology be printed in the 
Record at the end of my statement.
  New Mexico State is also a leader in other areas of bridge 
inspection. The university has provided training for bridge inspectors 
for over 30 years. It has also developed expertise in using a virtual 
reality approach to document a bridge's physical condition.
  This is just a glimpse at the high quality bridge research at New 
Mexico Sate University. The university is widely recognized as national 
leader in all aspects of bridge research and technology. I believe it 
is fully appropriate for NMSU to be recognized as the university 
technology bridge research center.
  The bill we are introducing today authorizes the Secretary of 
Transportation to establish and operate the New Mexico State University 
Bridge Research Center. I do believe NMSU has earned this honor. The 
bill mirrors the language for University Transportation Centers in the 
Senate-passed SAFETEA from the 108th Congress and provides $40 million 
in funding over 6 years from the Highway Trust Fund to operate the 
bridge technology center.
  The Federal Highway Administration has long recognized the quality of 
the work at NMSU and has provided grants to support their outstanding 
work. In November 2004, NMSU's bridge center was awarded a $400,000 
grant to install fiber-sensors in a new bridge over Interstate 10 in 
Dona Ana, NM. The sensors will relay information about the effects of 
stress on the bridge long before any signs of aging are visible. This 
is the fourth bridge in New Mexico to be equipped with the smart bridge 
technology. NMSU's Dr. Rola Idriss is the principal investigator of 
these projects.
  NMSU's work is also being recognized internationally. Highway 
departments in Switzerland, Belgium, and Japan are experimenting with 
the smart bridge technology. In October 2004, NMSU's Dr. David Jauregui 
and Dr. Ken White were invited speakers for the International 
Conference on Bridge Inspection and Bridge Management in Beijing, 
China. Dr. White delivered the keynote address for the conference. NMSU 
is currently developing a memorandum of agreement with the Chinese 
bridge community to develop a bridge inspection and management training 
program.

[[Page 7927]]

  Congress has also already recognized the fine work at NMSU. For 
example, at my request, Congress provided $600,000 in 2001 for bridge 
research at New Mexico State University, $250,000 in 2003, $500,000 in 
2004 and $125,000 for the current fiscal year.
  The specific purpose of NMSU's Bridge Research Center will be to 
contribute to improving the performance of the Nation's highway 
bridges. The center will emphasize five goals: 1. Increasing the number 
of skilled individuals entering the field of transportation; 2. 
Improving the monitoring of the structural health of highway bridges; 
3. Developing innovative technologies for testing and assessment of 
bridges; 4. Developing technologies and procedures for ensuring bridge 
safety, reliability, and security; and 5. Providing training in the 
methods of bridge inspection and evaluation.
  Building on NMSU's research work, the University Technology Center 
will develop a strong educational component, including degree 
opportunities in bridge engineering at both the undergraduate and 
graduate levels. In addition, the center will have a cooperative 
certificate program for training and professional development. Distance 
education technology and computer-based learning will allow programs to 
be offered at any of the universities.
  The engineers at New Mexico State University have applied their vast 
talents, tools, and techniques to solving technological problems with 
highway bridges for over 30 years. The team is well established and 
maintains cutting-edge expertise. The members of the team are 
recognized and respected at the national and international levels 
through accomplishments in bridge testing, monitoring, and evaluation.
  I ask all senators to support the designation of the New Mexico State 
University Bridge Research Center. I look forward to working this year 
with the Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, 
Senator Inhofe, and Senator Jeffords, the ranking member, to 
incorporate this bill into the full 6-year reauthorization of the 
transportation bill.
  I now ask unanimous consent that the letters to which I referred be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

              [From the Albuquerque Journal, Mar. 1, 2004]

     NMSU Designs High-Tech Beams To Monitor Soundness of Structure

                            (By Andrew Webb)

       What if a highway bridge could actually tell you it was 
     wearing out? Or, how about a building that could warn its 
     owners of unseen structural damage after an earthquake?
       That's what researchers from New Mexico State University 
     hope to produce by embedding high-tech optical sensors in 
     concrete beams. The six 90-ton beams, each with 120 sensors, 
     will support the westbound lanes of the Interstate 10 
     overpass at University Avenue in Las Cruces, expected to be 
     completed in July.
       When the bridge is complete, the sensors will give federal 
     and state highway departments feedback about the performance 
     of its design, the new high-performance concrete it is made 
     of, and its structural soundness as it ages, says NMSU 
     professor of civil engineering Rola Idriss.
       ``We'll get information on how the bridge carries its load 
     throughout its entire life,'' said Idriss. She was in 
     Albuquerque last week to help supervise the placement of the 
     sensors and fiber-optic lines in molds at an Albuquerque 
     construction materials business.
       The bridge will be the first of its kind in the country, 
     Idriss says. NMSU embedded similar sensors, which are 
     manufactured by the Swiss flrm Smartec, in a much smaller 
     Interstate 40 bridge over the Rio Puerco west of Albuquerque 
     in 2000.
       ``That research was very promising, so we're taking what we 
     learned on that bridge and putting it on a much larger 
     Interstate bridge,'' says Jimmy Camp, a state bridge engineer 
     with the New Mexico Department of Transportation, which 
     helped fund the $500,000 sensor project along with the 
     Federal Highway Administration.
       The total cost of the Las Cruces project, which began last 
     summer, is about $6.3 million.
       As the expected lifespan of concrete bridges has gone from 
     about 50 years in the Interstate system's early days to 
     nearly 80, builders are seeking better data on bridge 
     conditions, Camp says.
       ``We make a lot of assumptions with bridge theory,'' he 
     says.


                             OPTIC MONITORS

       The project entails stringing fiber-optic lines throughout 
     the concrete, through which beams of light are shot. As the 
     beam strains or stretches, the properties of the light 
     change. Those changes are picked up by sensors and relayed to 
     a data collection box near the bridge for eventual analysis 
     by NMSU, which then will give the information to the highway 
     department, Idriss said.
       ``Those changes can be calibrated to measure the strain,'' 
     she said.
       At present, inspection of bridges and other concrete 
     structures is done primarily by visual analysis and 
     electronic sensors on outside surfaces.
       ``Here, you're actually getting measurements from within,'' 
     Idriss said, adding that the added costs would be 
     insignificant in large projects.
       She said she thinks the technology could be applied to 
     other structures, such as buildings.
       ``It could become an industry standard,'' she said. ``Right 
     now, it's still in its infancy.''
       Highway departments in Switzerland, Belgium and Japan are 
     experimenting with similar technology, she said. About 20 of 
     the 560,000 major highway bridges in the U.S. have some sort 
     of onboard sensors to detect changes, vibration and other 
     factors, according to the Federal Highway Administration.
       The beams were cast at Albuquerque-based Rinker Prestress, 
     a division of Florida-based Rinker Materials, which employs 
     75 people at three New Mexico plants.
                                  ____


               [From the Associated Press, Oct. 4, 2004]

            Interstate 10 Bridge To Provide How Bridges Age

       Las Cruces, N.M.--Sensors monitoring stresses on an 
     Interstate 10 bridge will give researchers information on how 
     materials age.
       New Mexico State University tested the technology earlier 
     on a bridge over the Rio Puerco near Albuquerque. It 
     installed the technology in late summer in the I-10 bridge in 
     Las Cruces.
       The idea is that the bridge will provide information for 
     researchers on how to build bridges with high-performance 
     concretes, which could save highway departments money in the 
     future, said Wil Dooley, bridge engineer for the Federal 
     Highway Administration's state division.
       Inside the bridge's beams are fiber optic sensors that 
     monitor how each component bends and changes in different 
     weather and with varying weights of vehicles.
       The sensors carry data from the bridge to a locker-size box 
     near an off ramp, where NMSU scientists download the data 
     each week to a portable computer.
       ``These newer concretes are more durable and they're going 
     to last longer,'' Dooley said. ``All our calculations for how 
     to build bridges are made on traditional concrete. Studying 
     new concretes in the smart bridge will help us modify those 
     equations and make new bridges that last longer and cost less 
     to build.''
       NMSU researchers embedded 120 optical sensors in each of 
     six 90-ton concrete beams in the I-10 overpass. Beams of 
     light are carried by fiber optic lines laced through the 
     beams. As the beam strains or stretches, the properties of 
     the light change.
       New Mexico is an ideal location to test stresses on 
     different types of concrete. Hot days and cold nights cause 
     concrete to bend and flex, and that happens more in New 
     Mexico than in many other states, Dooley said.
       Rola Idriss, an NMSU civil engineering professor who is 
     developing the smart bridge technology, said the researchers 
     could download information from the sensors remotely, but the 
     I-10 bridge is close to campus.
       In the future, when the technology is put into bridges in 
     rural areas, highway departments could monitor them 
     remotely--even monitoring all the bridges in the state from 
     one location, she said.
       ``This is a trend to the future,'' Idriss said. ``The 
     bridge can give you real data about how things are aging. We 
     can use that data to fix problems early and design better 
     bridges with fewer problems in the future.''
       Highway engineers intend to put the technology next into a 
     bridge on U.S. 70 near White Sands National Monument.
       That might be ideal for testing remote monitoring systems, 
     Idriss said.
       Dooley said the technology also could be used in large 
     projects to sense corrosion and allow problems to be 
     corrected before a catastrophic failure, Dooley said.
       Adding sensors does not add much expense. The I-10 bridge 
     cost $6.2 million; the sensors and monitoring equipment, 
     along with the expense of studying the data, ran $500,000 
     more, with the money coming from the Federal Highway 
     Administration and state Department of Transportation, Idriss 
     said.
       ``We're basically proving out the technology for them,'' 
     she said. ``The information we gather feeds right back to 
     them. They tell us what they want and we research it.''
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Lott, and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 914. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a 
competitive grant program to build capacity in veterinary medical 
education

[[Page 7928]]

and expand the workforce of veterinarians engaged in public health 
practice and biomedical research; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, April 27, 2005, marks an important day for 
health care, especially personnel involved in public health 
specialties, because it is the day that I introduced the Veterinary 
Workforce Expansion Act, VWEA. This bill will create a new competitive 
grant program in the Department of Health and Human Services for 
capital improvements to the Nation's veterinary medical colleges.
  Many Americans do not realize that veterinarians are essential for 
early detection and response to unusual disease events that could be 
linked to newly emerging infectious diseases such as monkeypox, SARS, 
and West Nile Virus, just to name a few. The training and education 
that veterinarians receive prepares them to address the concerns of 
bioterrorism and emerging infectious diseases, most of which are 
transmitted from animals to man. In fact, 80 percent of biothreat 
agents of concern fall into this category. I believe veterinarians 
should be our first-responders when it comes to these threats. I know 
that they are uniquely qualified to address these issues because I have 
received this training myself. I received my DVM from Colorado State 
University and have kept my license current every year since I closed 
my clinic and ran for elected office.
  Veterinarians are a unique national resource, as they are the only 
health professionals trained in multi-species comparative medicine. As 
a result of this training, the veterinary profession is able to provide 
an extraordinary link between agriculture and human medicine. The uses 
made of this link have been extensive, with multiple benefits to 
society.
  Currently, approximately 20 percent, 15,000, of all veterinarians in 
the United States are I engaged in either private population-health 
practice with a significant food animal component or public practice in 
one of its various forms. The need for new graduates entering the field 
is imperative to preparing the country for the threats of agroterrorism 
and bioterrorism. If new graduates do not enter these fields, 
government, nongovernmental organizations, industry, and agribusiness 
will employ lesser qualified individuals to fill their needs.
  There is a critical shortage of veterinarians working in public 
health areas. The Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, U.S. Public Health Service, veterinary 
academia, National Research Council, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics 
are unified in reporting that the shortage of veterinarians in the 
workforce will only continue to worsen. Combined with a rapidly growing 
population and increased human to animal interaction, there is an 
urgent need to adequately prepare the Nation's veterinary colleges so 
they may educate the workforce of the future.
  The VWEA would allow credentialed schools of veterinary medicine to 
compete for Federal grant funding under the Department of Health and 
Human Services. These grants would be for capital costs associated with 
expanding the existing schools of veterinary medicine or their academic 
programs in the areas of public health practice. This new grant program 
will be authorized for 10 fiscal years. At that point, it is my hope 
and goal that the veterinary medical colleges will be adequately 
prepared to educate the veterinary workforce for the future.
  For more than 100 years, veterinary medical colleges have effectively 
delivered a core educational program that has enabled veterinarians to 
adapt and respond to evolving societal needs. Being a veterinarian 
myself, I want to continue this tradition by expanding existing 
veterinary colleges. I hope that you will join me in my efforts to 
protect the Nation's public health by providing much-needed support for 
veterinary medical education.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Ensign):
  S. 916. A bill to provide for the release of certain land from the 
Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area in the State of Nevada and to grant 
a right-of-way across the released land for the construction and 
maintenance of a flood control project; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Orchard 
Detention Basin Flood Control Act for myself and Senator Ensign. This 
Act will release approximately 65 acres of land managed by the Bureau 
of Land Management in Clark County, NV; from the Sunrise Mountain 
Instant Study Area to allow the construction of an important flood 
control project.
  The Orchard Detention Basin project is part of the Clark County 
Regional Flood Control District's Master Plan to protect the Las Vegas 
Valley from flooding. This comprehensive floodplain management program 
is designed to protect private and public lands from flood damage and 
to save lives in this rapidly growing metropolitan area. When 
completed, the Orchard Detention Basin project will protect 
approximately 1,800 acres of urban development from flooding and reduce 
the magnitude of flooding further downstream.
  The boundary change executed by this legislation is needed because a 
portion of the detention basin project lies within the boundaries of 
the Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area. An ``instant study area'' 
designation places development restrictions on public lands similar to 
those on wilderness study areas. This designation currently prevents 
the construction of this important flood control project, leaving the 
land and residents living downstream vulnerable to flood damage.
  Even though the Las Vegas Valley is a desert, flash flooding is an 
all too common problem affecting the people in Las Vegas. Along with 
property damage and deaths related to flooding, Clark County residents 
experience inconvenience resulting from impassable roads during 
flooding events. Support services such as police, fire and ambulance 
can also be delayed, creating life-threatening incidents.
  I look forward to working with the Energy Committee and my other 
distinguished friends to move this bill in a timely manner during the 
current session.
  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. 916

       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 ``Orchard Detention Basin 
     Flood Control Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) County.--The term ``County'' means Clark County, 
     Nevada.
       (2) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Orchard 
     Detention Basin'' and dated March 18, 2005.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 3. RELEASE OF CERTAIN LAND IN THE SUNRISE MOUNTAIN 
                   INSTANT STUDY AREA.

       (a) Finding.--Congress finds that the land described in 
     subsection (c) has been adequately studied for wilderness 
     designation under section 603 of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782).
       (b) Release.--The land described in subsection (c)--
       (1) is no longer subject to section 603(c) of the Federal 
     Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c)); 
     and
       (2) shall be managed in accordance with--
       (A) land management plans adopted under section 202 of that 
     Act (43 U.S.C. 1712); and
       (B) cooperative conservation agreements in existence on the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Description of Land.--The land referred to in 
     subsections (a) and (b) is the approximately 65 acres of land 
     in the Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area of the County that 
     is--
       (1) known as the ``Orchard Detention Basin''; and
       (2) designated for release on the map.
       (d) Right-of-way.--The Secretary shall grant to the County 
     a right-of-way to the land described in subsection (c) for 
     the construction and maintenance of the Orchard Detention 
     Basin Project on the land.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA:

[[Page 7929]]

  S. 917. A bill to amend title 38; United States Code, to make 
permanent the pilot program for direct housing loans for Native 
American veterans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I rise to offer legislation that 
would make the Native American Veteran Housing Loan Pilot Program 
permanent. In April 1992, I sponsored a bill that established the 
Native American Veteran Housing Loan Pilot Program. That bill later 
became Public Law 102-547 and authorized the Department of Veterans 
Affairs (VA) to establish a pilot program that would provide veterans 
with assistance in purchasing, constructing, and improving homes 
through 1997. This pilot program has been extended several times. In 
fact, last Session Congress extended this pilot program by three years.
  Through January of this year, 443 loans were created under this 
program. It is time to make this program permanent.
  The Native American home ownership rate is about half the rate of the 
general U.S. population. This issue partially stems from the fact that 
lenders generally require that buyers own the parcel of land on which 
their homes will be located. This is difficult for many in Indian 
Country, Alaska, and Hawaii because their homes are on trust lands. 
Most lenders decline these loan applications because Federal law 
prohibits a lender from taking possession of Native trust lands in the 
event of a default. Several Federal programs have been developed to 
provide home ownership opportunities to Native Americans. The Native 
American Veteran Housing Loan Program is one such program that has 
helped to make home ownership a reality for indigenous peoples, 
particularly Native Hawaiians.
  Under this program, VA offers loan guaranties that protect lenders 
against loss up to the amount of the guaranty if the borrower fails to 
repay the loan. Previous to the Native American Veteran Housing Loan 
Program, Native American veterans who resided on these lands were 
unable to qualify for VA home-loan benefits. With the Native American 
Veteran Housing Loan Program, indigenous peoples residing on trust 
lands are now able to use this very important VA benefit.
  The Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program is intended to serve 
veterans who are eligible for homes under the Hawaiian Homes Commission 
Act, and who reside on Pacific Islands lands that have been communally 
owned by cultural tradition and on Native American trust lands on the 
continental United States. This VA-administered program assists Native 
American veterans by providing them direct loans to build or purchase 
homes on such lands.
  Before VA can make a loan on tribal trust land, the tribe must enter 
into a Memorandum of Understanding with VA to clarify some of the 
issues that could arise when administering the program. During fiscal 
year 2004, VA entered into two Memoranda of Understanding with tribal 
entities. In addition, VA is currently negotiating nine Memoranda of 
Understanding with Native American tribes. Trust lands that are 
eligible for this program include tribally and individually held 
trusts. Per a Memorandum of Understanding between VA and the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs (BIA), VA and BIA Regional Offices work to implement 
this loan program together. Additionally, VA personnel continue to 
conduct outreach with tribal representatives to solicit assistance in 
reaching out to tribal members who are veterans.
  Per capita, Native Americans have the highest percentage of people 
serving in the United States Armed Forces. While they represent less 
that 1 percent of the population, they make up 1.6 percent of the Armed 
Forces. I want to reiterate that through January of 2005, 443 loans 
have been made to Native Americans under this program. This allows 
those who have served our nation so honorably and their families to be 
a part of the American Dream of home ownership. We need to make the 
Native American Veteran Housing Loan permanent this year.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 917

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

     SECTION 1. PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR HOUSING LOANS FOR NATIVE 
                   AMERICAN VETERANS.

       (a) Permanent Authority.--Section 3761 of title 38, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 3761. Authority for housing loans for Native American 
       veterans

       ``(a) The Secretary shall make direct housing loans to 
     Native American veterans in accordance with the provisions of 
     this subchapter.
       ``(b) The purpose of loans under this subchapter is to 
     permit Native American veterans to purchase, construct, or 
     improve dwellings on trust land.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 3762 of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``under this 
     subchapter'' after ``Native American veteran'' in the matter 
     preceding paragraph (1);
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)(E), by striking ``in order to 
     ensure'' and all that follows and inserting a period;
       (3) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking ``shall be the 
     amount'' and all that follows in the second sentence and 
     inserting ``shall be such amount as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate for the purpose of this subchapter.'';
       (4) in subsection (d)(1), by striking the second sentence;
       (5) in subsection (i)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``of the pilot program'' 
     and all that follows and inserting ``of the availability of 
     direct housing loans for Native American veterans under this 
     subchapter.''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``under the pilot 
     program'' and all that follows and inserting ``under this 
     subchapter'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``in participating in 
     the pilot program'' and inserting ``in participating in the 
     making of direct loans under this subchapter''; and
       (6) by striking subsection (j).
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of subchapter V 
     of chapter 37 of such title is amended to read as follows:

     ``SUBCHAPTER V--HOUSING LOANS FOR NATIVE AMERICAN VETERANS''.

       (2) The table of contents for such chapter is amended--
       (A) by striking the matter relating to the subchapter 
     heading of subchapter V and inserting the following new item:


     ``Subchapter V--Housing Loans for Native American Veterans'';

     and
       (B) by striking the item relating to section 3761 and 
     inserting the following new item:

``3761. Authority for housing loans for Native American veterans.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. OBAMA (for himself, Mr. Talent, and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 918. A bill to provide for Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) refueling 
capability at new and existing refueling station facilities to promote 
energy security and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, we have all heard from folks back home 
about the high price of gasoline. When you pull into a gas station to 
fill up your tank, you're now paying some of the highest prices of all 
time.
  And when you turn on the news, you see that our dependence on foreign 
oil keeps us tied to one of the most dangerous and unstable regions in 
the world. With oil at more than $50 per barrel, some argue that the 
best way to deal with high gasoline prices is to wait it out--to wait 
until the world market dynamics change.
  I disagree with that mindset. For too long now, we've relied too 
heavily on foreign oil to fuel our energy needs in this country. This 
is not good for the United States--not for our economy, not for our 
national security, and not for our people.
  The bill I am introducing today, along with my distinguished 
colleagues from Illinois and Missouri, is designed to do something 
about fuel prices and our reliance on foreign oil--something rooted in 
reality, something achievable in the short term, and something that 
actually works.
  Last week, I visited a gasoline station in Springfield, IL, where 
along with regular gasoline, a new kind of fuel is offered for 
consumers--a fuel

[[Page 7930]]

known as E-85. E-85 is a clean, alternative form of transportation fuel 
consisting of a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. 
Ethanol is made from renewable, Midwestern corn, and it is 40-60 cents 
cheaper per gallon than standard gasoline. Last week, at this 
Springfield station, regular gasoline was listed at $2.06 and E-85 was 
selling for $1.69.
  Not every car can run on E-85 fuel--but there are millions of cars 
that can. They're known as ``flexible-fuel vehicles,'' and the auto 
industry is turning out hundreds of thousands of them every year. And 
if any of you are wondering whether cars will run as well on E-85 as 
they would on regular gas, just ask the Indy 500, which recently 
announced that all of their cars will soon run on E-85 fuel.
  The only problem we have now is that we're in short supply of E-85 
stations. While there are more than 180,000 gas stations all over 
America, there are only about 400 E-85 stations. And although E-85 has 
many environmental benefits and is a higher performing fuel, the fuel 
economy of E-85 is slightly lower than that of regular gasoline. An 
additional incentive is needed to help ensure that the cost of this 
clean fuel remains competitive with that of regular gasoline.
  That is why I'm introducing a bill to provide a tax credit of 50% for 
building an E-85 fuel station and a tax credit of 35 cents per gallon 
of E-85 fuel. This provision is similar to a provision that already has 
passed the Senate three times. I hope my colleagues will pass this 
provision again.
  We've talked for too long about energy independence in this country, 
and I think this bill gives us an opportunity to actually get something 
done about it. I urge the support of my colleagues of this bill, and I 
thank the Chair.
  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. 918

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE, ETC.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``E-85 Fuel 
     Utilization and Infrastructure Development Incentives Act of 
     2005''.
       (b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this division an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986.
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title, etc.
Sec. 2. Purpose.
Sec. 3. Findings.
Sec. 4. Incentives for the installation of alternative fuel refueling 
              stations.
Sec. 5. Incentives for the retail sale of alternative fuels as motor 
              vehicle fuel.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to decrease the dependence of 
     the United States on foreign oil by increasing the use of 
     high ratio blends of gasoline with a minimum 85 percent 
     domestically derived ethanol content (E-85) as an alternative 
     fuel and providing greater access to this fuel for American 
     motorists.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The growing United States reliance on foreign produced 
     petroleum and the recent escalation of crude oil prices 
     demands that all prudent measures be undertaken to increase 
     United States refining capacity, domestic oil production, and 
     expanded utilization of alternative forms of transportation 
     fuels and infrastructure.
       (2) Recent studies confirm the environmental and overall 
     energy security benefits of high ratio blends of gasoline 
     with a minimum 85 percent domestically derived ethanol 
     content (E-85), especially with regard to the reduction of 
     greenhouse gas emissions from the national on-road passenger 
     car vehicle fleet.
       (3) The market penetration of E-85 capable Flexible Fuel 
     Vehicles (FFVs) now exceeds 5,000,000 with an additional 
     1,000,000 or more FFVs expected to be added annually as 
     automakers continue to respond positively to congressionally 
     provided production incentives.
       (4) It is further recognized that actual implementation of 
     the use of E-85 fuel has been significantly underutilized due 
     primarily to the lack of E-85 refueling infrastructure 
     availability and promotion and that such utilization rate 
     will continue to lag unless resources are provided to 
     substantially accelerate national refueling infrastructure 
     development.
       (5) Additionally, incentives in the form of tax credits can 
     serve to stimulate infrastructure development and E-85 fuel 
     utilization.

     SEC. 4. INCENTIVES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL 
                   REFUELING STATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 (relating to foreign tax credit, etc.) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 30B. ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE REFUELING PROPERTY 
                   CREDIT.

       ``(a) Credit Allowed.--There shall be allowed as a credit 
     against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year 
     an amount equal to 50 percent of the amount paid or incurred 
     by the taxpayer during the taxable year for the installation 
     of qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property.
       ``(b) Limitation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The credit allowed under subsection 
     (a)--
       ``(A) with respect to any retail alternative fuel vehicle 
     refueling property, shall not exceed $30,000, and
       ``(B) with respect to any residential alternative fuel 
     vehicle refueling property, shall not exceed $1,000.
       ``(2) Phaseout.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of any qualified alternative 
     fuel vehicle refueling property placed in service after 
     December 31, 2010, the limit otherwise applicable under 
     paragraph (1) shall be reduced by--
       ``(i) 25 percent in the case of any alternative fuel 
     vehicle refueling property placed in service in calendar year 
     2011, and
       ``(ii) 50 percent in the case of any alternative fuel 
     vehicle refueling property placed in service in calendar year 
     2012.
       ``(c) Year Credit Allowed.--The credit allowed under 
     subsection (a) shall be allowed in the taxable year in which 
     the qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property is 
     placed in service by the taxpayer.
       ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling 
     property.--The term `qualified alternative fuel vehicle 
     refueling property' has the same meaning given for clean-fuel 
     vehicle refueling property by section 179A(d), but only with 
     respect to any fuel at least 85 percent of the volume of 
     which consists of ethanol.
       ``(2) Residential alternative fuel vehicle refueling 
     property.--The term `residential alternative fuel vehicle 
     refueling property' means qualified alternative fuel vehicle 
     refueling property which is installed on property which is 
     used as the principal residence (within the meaning of 
     section 121) of the taxpayer.
       ``(3) Retail alternative fuel vehicle refueling property.--
     The term `retail alternative fuel vehicle refueling property' 
     means qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property 
     which is installed on property (other than property described 
     in paragraph (2)) used in a trade or business of the 
     taxpayer.
       ``(e) Application With Other Credits.--The credit allowed 
     under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed 
     the excess (if any) of--
       ``(1) the regular tax for the taxable year reduced by the 
     sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and sections 27, 
     29, and 30, over
       ``(2) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.
       ``(f) Basis Reduction.--For purposes of this title, the 
     basis of any property shall be reduced by the portion of the 
     cost of such property taken into account under subsection 
     (a).
       ``(g) No Double Benefit.--No deduction shall be allowed 
     under section 179A with respect to any property with respect 
     to which a credit is allowed under subsection (a).
       ``(h) Refueling Property Installed for Tax-exempt 
     Entities.--In the case of qualified alternative fuel vehicle 
     refueling property installed on property owned or used by an 
     entity exempt from tax under this chapter, the person which 
     installs such refueling property for the entity shall be 
     treated as the taxpayer with respect to the refueling 
     property for purposes of this section (and such refueling 
     property shall be treated as retail alternative fuel vehicle 
     refueling property) and the credit shall be allowed to such 
     person, but only if the person clearly discloses to the 
     entity in any installation contract the specific amount of 
     the credit allowable under this section.
       ``(i) Carryforward Allowed.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the credit amount allowable under 
     subsection (a) for a taxable year exceeds the amount of the 
     limitation under subsection (e) for such taxable year 
     (referred to as the `unused credit year' in this subsection), 
     such excess shall be allowed as a credit carryforward for 
     each of the 20 taxable years following the unused credit 
     year.
       ``(2) Rules.--Rules similar to the rules of section 39 
     shall apply with respect to the credit carryforward under 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(j) Special Rules.--Rules similar to the rules of 
     paragraphs (4) and (5) of section 179A(e) shall apply.

[[Page 7931]]

       ``(k) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as necessary to carry out the provisions of this 
     section.
       ``(l) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any 
     property placed in service after December 31, 2013.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the 
     end of paragraph (30), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (31) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(32) to the extent provided in section 30B(f).''.
       (2) Section 55(c)(2) is amended by inserting ``30B(e),'' 
     after ``30(b)(3),''.
       (3) The table of sections for subpart B of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 30A the following new item:

``Sec. 30B. Alternative fuel vehicle refueling property credit.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such 
     date.

     SEC. 5. INCENTIVES FOR THE RETAIL SALE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS 
                   AS MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 (relating to business related credits) is amended 
     by inserting after section 40A the following new section:

     ``SEC. 40B. CREDIT FOR RETAIL SALE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS AS 
                   MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL.

       ``(a) General Rule.--The alternative fuel retail sales 
     credit for any taxable year is 35 cents for each gallon of 
     alternative fuel sold at retail by the taxpayer during such 
     year.
       ``(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Alternative fuel.--The term `alternative fuel' means 
     any fuel at least 85 percent of the volume of which consists 
     of ethanol.
       ``(2) Sold at retail.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `sold at retail' means the 
     sale, for a purpose other than resale, after manufacture, 
     production, or importation.
       ``(B) Use treated as sale.--If any person uses alternative 
     fuel (including any use after importation) as a fuel to 
     propel any qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle (as 
     defined in this section) before such fuel is sold at retail, 
     then such use shall be treated in the same manner as if such 
     fuel were sold at retail as a fuel to propel such a vehicle 
     by such person.
       ``(3) Qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle.--The term 
     `new qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle' means any 
     motor vehicle--
       ``(A) which is capable of operating on an alternative fuel,
       ``(B) the original use of which commences with the 
     taxpayer,
       ``(C) which is acquired by the taxpayer for use or lease, 
     but not for resale, and
       ``(D) which is made by a manufacturer.
       ``(c) Election To Pass Credit.--A person which sells 
     alternative fuel at retail may elect to pass the credit 
     allowable under this section to the purchaser of such fuel 
     or, in the event the purchaser is a tax-exempt entity or 
     otherwise declines to accept such credit, to the person which 
     supplied such fuel, under rules established by the Secretary.
       ``(d) Pass-Thru in the Case of Estates and Trusts.--Under 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the 
     rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
       ``(e) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any 
     fuel sold at retail after December 31, 2010.''.
       (b) Credit Treated as Business Credit.--Section 38(b) 
     (relating to current year business credit) is amended by 
     striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (18), by striking 
     the period at the end of paragraph (19) and inserting ``, 
     plus'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(20) the alternative fuel retail sales credit determined 
     under section 40B(a).''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 40A the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 40B. Credit for retail sale of alternative fuels as motor 
              vehicle fuel.''.

       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to fuel sold at retail after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such 
     date.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BURNS (for himself, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. 
        Craig, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Johnson, Mr. 
        Baucus, and Mr. Coleman):
  S. 919. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to enhance 
competition among and between rail carriers in order to ensure 
efficient rail service and reasonable rail rates, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, as the Senate begins the important task of 
debating the highway bill reauthorization, another critical 
infrastructure issue comes to mind: railroads. In Montana, we rely 
heavily on both passenger and freight rail for our transportation 
needs. However, Montana is served by only one major railroad, resulting 
in shippers being captive to little or no competition for price or 
service quality. That lack of competition hurts our competitiveness for 
agriculture and manufacturing. It drives up the cost of electricity, 
because of the increased costs for coal. Sometimes, it even costs us 
jobs in Montana.
  To address the problems faced by many captive shippers, I am 
introducing today the Railroad Competition Act of 2005. I am joined by 
my colleagues, Senators Rockefeller, Dorgan, Craig, Dayton, Vitter, 
Thune, Johnson, Baucus, and Coleman. This legislation will extend 
competition to many captive rail customers and correct problems in the 
Surface Transportation Board's implementation of railroad deregulation. 
Specifically, the legislation ensures that rail customers will receive 
rate quotes for movements between various points on a railroad's 
system; frees regional and short line railroads to provide access to 
additional major systems; provides captive rail customers who cannot 
afford to participate in expensive rate challenge proceedings access to 
arbitration; and directs the STB to adopt a more realistic and workable 
rate reasonableness standard.
  In addition to a lack of competition in many markets, the rail 
industry in America is badly in need of investment into its 
infrastructure. To address the infrastructure problem, the legislation 
increases ten-fold the current Railroad Rehabilitation and 
Infrastructure Financing program. The legislation also expands who is 
eligible for the loans and loan guarantees, so that qualified shipping 
entities can also invest in rail infrastructure.
  This is about jobs, plain and simple. Last year, when the intermodal 
hub in Shelby, Montana was closed, over 40 jobs were lost. The Port 
Authority in Shelby reached out to the railroads to persuade them to 
keep the hub open, but without competition, the single supplier chose 
to close. Those jobs are real losses in Shelby, a town of a little over 
3,000 people. As high rail rates make U.S. products less competitive, 
imports flow in to fill the gap--and that costs us jobs. I understand 
that the rail industry employs a lot of people, and I am glad for those 
jobs. But we can not let lack of choice and competition in price and 
service cost us jobs in other areas.
  Since passage of the Staggers Act in 1980, the railroad industry has 
experienced significant consolidation, from over 40 major railroads 
down to 7. Roughly 35 percent of the rail traffic in America is 
captive, driving up the cost of transportation and placing a heavy 
burden on shippers.
  Captive shippers, like my farmers in Montana, have nowhere to go to 
seek relief. The Surface Transportation Board, the watchdogs over the 
rail system, is a complicated and expensive mess that hardly provides a 
fair forum for disputes. To bring a rate reasonableness case, 
challenging the unfair rates charged to captive shippers, a rail 
customer must first file huge fees--fees that will double in the coming 
weeks. Then, the customer must construct a hypothetical railroad and 
prove to the STB that rail transportation theoretically can be provided 
at a lower fee. That process can cost over $2 million per case, and 
take years to see through. At the end, even if the shipper wins, all he 
gets is a lower fee in the future. Too often, damages for past 
overcharging are not awarded. Meanwhile, the railroad sits idly by, 
under no obligation to justify its rates, and continues to collect the 
exorbitant fees that are under dispute. This system can not stand.
  The Railroad Competition Act of 2005 directs the STB to address this 
nonsensical system, and develops a final offer arbitration option, 
allowing shippers to take their case to a neutral arbiter. These 
provisions are necessary, not to punish railroads, but to develop a 
level playing field that keeps my small businesses and agriculture 
producers in business.

[[Page 7932]]

  Railroads are an essential part of our nation's infrastructure, a 
vast system that includes our highways, railroads, electric 
transmission lines, pipelines, and digital infrastructure. In a rural 
state like Montana, we rely on the rails to cover long distances 
efficiently, so rail must remain a viable shipping option. We need to 
achieve affordability, while still allowing sustainability for the 
railroads. There is a necessary public interest in our shared 
infrastructure, and the Railroad Competition Act of 2005 is designed to 
address legitimate public concerns, in Montana and around the nation, 
about rail operations. I look forward to working with my colleagues to 
secure passage of this important legislation.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to join with 
my colleagues Senator Burns, Senator Dorgan, Senator Craig, Senator 
Dayton, Senator Vitter, Senator Johnson, Senator Thune, Senator 
Coleman, and Senator Baucus to introduce the Railroad Competition Act 
of 2005. This legislation encourages the competition and consumer 
protection in the freight railroad market that Congress intended when 
it partially deregulated the industry in 1980 with the passage of the 
Staggers Act.
  Introduction of legislation in this vein is a bit of a ritual for 
this Senator. West Virginia industries depend on efficient and 
dependable rail service at fair prices to move their products to 
market. This is a perfectly reasonable goal. However, for shippers 
without competitive rail access--referred to as captive shippers--it is 
a cruel and impossible dream. I have tried for years, with partners 
from both sides of the aisle and all parts of the country, to change 
the status quo, and improve the economic situation for rail shippers 
and retail shoppers. This is the seventh time since 1985 I have 
sponsored legislation to address this issue, and the fifth congress in 
a row in which I have worked closely with my good friends Conrad Burns 
and Byron Dorgan to help shippers and their customers. And I won't give 
up until I actually succeed.
  Predictably, the railroads will overreact to this bill with scathing 
accusations of what we are doing. In truth, we intend nothing more 
radical than helping shippers, consumers, and the railroads themselves, 
reap the benefits of the basic principles of capitalism--the ability of 
sophisticated actors to conduct arms-length negotiations for 
competition, service, and fair prices. Currently, Class I railroads 
overcharge and underserve captive shippers with impunity, and with an 
antitrust exemption preventing meaningful oversight by Congress. 
Customers have no power. This means higher prices for electricity, 
food, medicine, paper products; the chemicals to protect our water 
supply and crops, and the basic ingredients of the plastics in many of 
the goods we purchase. This is crucial to protecting commerce in the 
United States. So far, we have been thwarted, though we remain 
undeterred in our efforts and confident of the validity of our 
objectives.
  In the 1970s, Congress observed a bloated freight rail network, 
unprofitable railroads, and service was anything but efficient and 
dependable. When the Staggers Act was passed in 1980, Congress gave a 
green light to deregulation of the railroad industry. But, as with the 
deregulation of every other industry that Congress has allowed, there 
were to be constraints on the ability of railroads to abuse shippers 
left captive to just one railroad. The Staggers Act left it to the 
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to watch over a partially 
deregulated industry carrying out Staggers' dual goals: Improving the 
financial health and viability of the railroads; and improving and 
maintaining service for shippers. The ICC was responsible for ensuring 
fair treatment and reasonable rates for those shippers made captive by 
mergers or business decisions allowed under Staggers.
  The success of Staggers has been completely one-sided. Captive rail 
shippers in my state of West Virginia have told me--since before I came 
to the United States Senate--that service was horrible and rates being 
charged were too high. That is still true today. When I was first 
running for the Senate, the country was served by about 40 ``Class I'' 
railroads. After Staggers the railroad industry ``rationalized'' its 
routes--meaning it dropped unprofitable lines and left more and more 
shippers captive to just one railroad.
  A virtually unimpeded string of rail mergers during the last 25 years 
has only compounded the problem. The number of Class I railroads has 
dropped to seven. Four of these--CSX and Norfolk Southern in the East 
and Burlington Northern Santa Fe and the Union Pacific in the West--
completely dominate the industry, accounting for about 90 percent of 
the freight rail traffic in the nation.
  This is simple. Fewer market participants mean less competition, and 
less competition opens up the possibility of the abuse of local 
monopoly power. Under the misadministration of the Staggers Act, first 
by the ICC, and later by its successor agency the Surface 
Transportation Board (STB), abuse of captive shippers has not only 
gotten worse, but it has been unjustly bestowed a veneer of propriety 
by a series of unwise administrative decisions and at least one court 
case that gave grudging deference to an agency, the STB, that has 
failed to carry out the clear directions of Congress. The STB, to which 
shippers have looked for a solution, has become a facilitator of the 
problem.
  The goals of the Railroad Competition Act are really quite mundane. 
My colleagues and I hope only to give life to a freight rail system 
originally envisioned by the drafters of the Staggers Act. We hope to 
send to the President a bill that will allow captive shippers the most 
basic right in business negotiations: They will be able to get the 
railroads that ship their products simply to quote a rate for the 
service.
  My colleagues may be amazed to find out that the STB's current 
reading of the Staggers Act allows shippers no such right. Our 
legislation will simply require railroads to tell their customers the 
cost of moving a certain quantity of product from their manufacturing 
facility to their customer. Point A to Point B. Nothing in business is 
more basic, but it is a basic of business negotiations captive shippers 
do not currently enjoy. Additionally, our legislation also would do the 
following: clarifies that the STB shall promote competition among rail 
carriers, helping to maintain both reasonable freight rail rates and 
consistent and efficient rail service; creates a system of ``final 
offer'' arbitration for matters before the STB; authorizes the STB to 
remove so-called ``paper barriers'' that prevent short-line and 
regional railroads from providing improved service to shippers; 
requires STB to act in the public interest and removes required showing 
of railroads' anti-competitive conduct; caps filing fees for STB rate 
cases at the level of federal district courts (reducing filing fee from 
the current fee $65,000, which is to be doubled in 2005); calls for a 
Department of Transportation (DOT) study of rail competition; allows 
elected officials and state railroad regulators to petition the STB for 
declarations of ``areas of inadequate rail competition,'' with 
appropriate remedies; creates position of Rail Customer Advocate at 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); and expands infrastructure 
modernization loan guarantee program.
  In closing I would suggest that, rather than the highly charged 
arguments we have engaged in over the years, my colleagues encourage 
the railroads to take shippers' concerns seriously, and that we all 
work to create a freight rail marketplace made up of companies hungry, 
in the best capitalist sense of that word, to do business. That is the 
goal of the Railroad Competition Act, and I look forward to its 
consideration by the full Senate.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORNYN:
  S. 920. A bill to amend chapter 1 of title 3, United States Code, 
relating to Presidential succession; to the Committee on Rules and 
Administration.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill I am 
introducing today--to amend chapter 1 of title 3, United States Code, 
relating to Presidential succession--be printed in the Record. I also 
ask unanimous

[[Page 7933]]

consent that the section by section analysis titled ``Presidential 
Succession Act of 2005'' and the letter sent to the chairmen of the RNC 
and DNC be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 920

       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 ``Presidential Succession Act 
     of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION.

       (a) In General.--Section 19(d) of title 3, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, Ambassador to the United Nations, 
     Ambassador to Great Britain, Ambassador to Russia, Ambassador 
     to China, Ambassador to France'' after ``Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``but not'' and all that 
     follows through the period and inserting ``or until the 
     disability of the President or Vice President is removed.'';
       (3) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``be held to constitute'' and inserting 
     ``not require''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following: ``Such individual 
     shall not receive compensation from holding that office 
     during the period that the individual acts as President under 
     this section, and shall be compensated for that period as 
     provided under subsection (c).''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) This subsection shall apply only to such officers 
     that are--
       ``(A) eligible to the office of President under the 
     Constitution;
       ``(B) appointed to an office listed under paragraph (1), by 
     and with the advice and consent of the Senate, prior to the 
     time the powers and duties of the President devolve to such 
     officer under paragraph (1); and
       ``(C) not under impeachment by the House of Representatives 
     at the time the powers and duties of the office of President 
     devolve upon them.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 19 of title 3, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``as Acting President'' 
     and inserting ``to act as President''; and
       (2) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``(a), (b), and 
     (d)'' and inserting ``(a) and (b)''; and
       (B) by striking the second sentence.

     SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING VOTES BY ELECTORS AFTER 
                   DEATH OR INCAPACITY OF NOMINEES.

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) during a Presidential election year, the nominees of 
     each political party for the office of President and Vice 
     President should jointly announce and designate on or before 
     the final day of the convention (or related event) at which 
     they are nominated the individuals for whom the electors of 
     President and Vice President who are pledged to vote for such 
     nominees should give their votes for such offices in the 
     event that such nominees are deceased or permanently 
     incapacitated prior to the date of the meeting of the 
     electors of each State under section 7 of title 3, United 
     States Code;
       (2) in the event a nominee for President is deceased or 
     permanently incapacitated prior to the date referred to in 
     paragraph (1) (but the nominee for Vice President of the same 
     political party is not deceased or permanently 
     incapacitated), the electors of President who are pledged to 
     vote for the nominee should give their votes to the nominee 
     of the same political party for the office of Vice President, 
     and the electors of Vice President who are pledged to vote 
     for the nominee for Vice President should give their votes to 
     the individual designated for such office by the nominees 
     under paragraph (1);
       (3) in the event a nominee for Vice President is deceased 
     or permanently incapacitated prior to the date referred to in 
     paragraph (1) (but the nominee for President of the same 
     political party is not deceased or permanently 
     incapacitated), the electors of Vice President who are 
     pledged to vote for such nominee should give their votes to 
     the individual designated for such office by the nominees 
     under paragraph (1);
       (4) in the event that both the nominee for President and 
     the nominee for Vice President of the same political party 
     are deceased or permanently incapacitated prior to the date 
     referred to in paragraph (1), the electors of President and 
     Vice President who are pledged to vote for such nominees 
     should vote for the individuals designated for each such 
     office by the nominees under paragraph (1); and
       (5) political parties should establish rules and procedures 
     consistent with the procedures described in the preceding 
     paragraphs, including procedures to obtain written pledges 
     from electors to vote in the manner described in such 
     paragraphs.

     SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT AND 
                   THE SMOOTH TRANSITION OF EXECUTIVE POWER.

       It is the sense of Congress that during the period 
     preceding the end of a term of office in which a President 
     will not be serving a succeeding term--
       (1) that President should consider submitting the 
     nominations of individuals to the Senate who are selected by 
     the President-elect for offices that fall within the line of 
     succession;
       (2) the Senate should consider conducting confirmation 
     proceedings and votes on the nominations described under 
     paragraph (1), to the extent determined appropriate by the 
     Senate, between January 3 and January 20 before the 
     Inauguration; and
       (3) that President should consider agreeing to sign and 
     deliver commissions for all approved nominations on January 
     20 before the Inauguration to ensure continuity of 
     Government.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

       The Presidential Succession Act of 2005--introduced by U.S. 
     Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) and U.S, Representative Brad 
     Sherman (D-CA) on April 27, 2005--makes a number of 
     significant improvements to the current Presidential 
     Succession Act, in order to ensure the continuity of the 
     Presidency in the event of a terrorist attack or other 
     crisis. This legislation implements Article II, Section 1, 
     Clause 6 of the U.S. Constitution, which provides that ``the 
     Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, 
     Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice 
     President, declaring what Officer shall then act as 
     President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the 
     Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.''
       This legislation is a more modest version of two bills 
     introduced by Senator Cornyn and Representative Sherman in 
     the last Congress to reform the Presidential Succession Act. 
     Because many constitutional experts believe that members of 
     Congress are constitutionally ineligible to serve in the line 
     of succession, both S. 2073 and H.R. 2749 would have 
     addressed a potential constitutional crisis by removing the 
     House Speaker and Senate President pro tempore from the line 
     of succession. By contrast, the 2005 version of the bill does 
     not attempt to address that particular controversy, but 
     instead leaves the Speaker and President pro tempore in the 
     line of succession. It is hoped that Congress will enact the 
     Presidential Succession Act of 2005 quickly, and that the 
     more controversial but nevertheless critical constitutional 
     issues arising out of current law can be addressed as well 
     through separate legislation.


                        Section 1. Short title.

            Section 2. Presidential Succession Act reforms.

       Amending the line of succession. This provision adds the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security to the line of succession. 
     Under current law, the Secretary of Homeland Security does 
     not fall within the line of succession. During the 108th 
     Congress, the Senate approved legislation to place the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security right behind the Attorney 
     General in the line of succession, but that proposal ran into 
     opposition in the House. This provision attempts to avoid 
     that controversy by placing the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security at the end of the current line of succession.
       In addition, this provision addresses the difficulty that 
     arises from the fact that all current members of the line of 
     succession generally work and live in the greater Washington, 
     D.C. area. Due to current law, a catastrophic incident in the 
     D.C. area could theoretically eliminate the entire line of 
     succession and leave the nation without anyone legally 
     eligible to serve as President for an extended period of 
     time. Accordingly, this provisions adds at the end of line of 
     succession senior federal officials who do not generally work 
     and live in the D.C. area specifically, the U.S. Ambassador 
     to the United Nations and the U.S. Ambassadors to each of the 
     four other permanent members of the U.N. Security Council 
     (Great Britain, Russia, China, and France).
       Reforming Cabinet succession. This provision eliminates the 
     requirement that a cabinet secretary must resign in order to 
     succeed to the Presidency. By doing so, this provision helps 
     ensure that a cabinet secretary will not hesitate to take the 
     reins, by ensuring that there will be a cabinet position to 
     which the officer may return after any period of service as 
     Acting President. This provision also helps cure a potential 
     constitutional defect in current law; some constitutional 
     scholars argue that only a current ``officer'' may act as 
     President under Article II.
       In addition, this provision addresses the so-called 
     ``bumping off'' problem in current law. The current 
     Presidential succession statute puts the Executive Branch in 
     a precarious position vis-a-vis Congress, because it allows 
     the House Speaker or Senate President pro tempore to assert 
     their right under current law to take over the reins at any 
     time from a cabinet officer who holds office as Acting 
     President. This aspect of current law raises serious 
     constitutional separation of powers problems, because it 
     effectively places the Presidency at the mercy of 
     Congressional leaders. In addition, current law raises a 
     potential constitutional problem because Article II, Section 
     1, Clause 6 of the U.S. Constitution states that any officer 
     who

[[Page 7934]]

     shall act as President ``shall act accordingly, until the 
     Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.'' 
     This provision eliminates this ``bumping off'' problem in 
     current law by eliminating the ability of the House Speaker 
     or Senate President pro tempore to assert their right under 
     current law to take over the reins from a cabinet officer 
     holding office as Acting President.
       Finally, this provision ensures that only individuals who 
     are actually confirmed to the Cabinet-level office are 
     eligible to serve in the line of succession. By doing so, 
     this provision prevents lower-level officers who rise to the 
     position of an acting Cabinet secretary from then acting as 
     President.
       Section 3. Presidential succession during the Presidential 
     selection process. This provision states the sense of 
     Congress that steps must be taken to ensure smooth 
     Presidential succession in the event of a crisis during the 
     Presidential selection process. The provision states that, 
     prior to their political party's nominating conventions, 
     candidates for President and Vice President should announce 
     individuals who should be chosen by members of the Electoral 
     College in the event that either the Presidential or Vice 
     Presidential nominee is killed or permanently incapacitated 
     prior to the Electoral College vote. The provision also 
     advises the political parties to craft rules and procedures 
     consistent with these principles.
       Section 4. Presidential succession during the Presidential 
     transition. This provision is modeled after S. Con. Res. 89 
     and H. Res. 775 from the last Congress. It states the sense 
     of Congress that, in the event of the election of a new 
     President, the outgoing Administration and incoming 
     Administration should work together to ensure a smooth 
     transition. Under current law, in the event of a terrorist 
     attack on the inauguration or other crisis, a member of the 
     prior Administration could theoretically rise to serve as 
     Acting President, because new Cabinet officers may have not 
     yet been nominated, confirmed, and appointed by that time. 
     Accordingly, this provision calls for cooperation between 
     outgoing and incoming Administrations to achieve smooth 
     Presidential transitions. It recommends that the outgoing 
     President nominate the individuals selected by the incoming 
     President for offices that fall within the line of 
     succession, it advises the Senate to act on those nominees to 
     the extent it deems appropriate prior to the inaugural event 
     on January 20, and finally, it recommends that the outgoing 
     President appoint confirmed individuals to their posts on 
     January 20 before the inaugural event.
                                  ____



                                Congress of the United States,

                                   Washington, DC, April 27, 2005.
     Chairman Ken Mehlman,
     Republican National Committee,
     Washington, DC.
     Chairman Howard Dean,
     Democratic National Committee,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Mehlman and Chairman Dean: This morning, we 
     introduce the Presidential Succession Act of 2005, to update 
     the existing Presidential Succession Act of 1947. The bill 
     addresses some of the most pressing problems in the current 
     law to ensure that, should tragedy strike, the nation will 
     have a clear and legitimate president.
       One of the primary areas of concern is the period between 
     the nominating conventions and the casting of Electoral. 
     votes. Should a presidential or vice-presidential nominee be 
     unable to proceed as a nominee between these two events, 
     general election voters and electors would face great 
     uncertainty about their votes. We are concerned about the 
     potential mischief and instability in our government that 
     could arise in such event.
       We have attached language from the Presidential Succession 
     act of 2005 which calls on political parties to address this 
     issue with appropriate party rules changes and public 
     declarations. Specifically, these changes would call upon the 
     presidential and vice-presidential nominees to jointly name 
     successors should tragedy occur. If only the presidential 
     nominee is unable to continue in an election, the vice 
     presidential nominee would become the presidential nominee.
       There is no reason for the political parties to await 
     Congressional action. The vagaries of current party rules can 
     be solved much sooner. We call on you to take action.
       Should you have questions or need additional information, 
     please do not hesitate to contact us.
           Sincerely,
                                                      John Cornyn,
                                             United States Senate.
                                                     Brad Sherman,
                           United States House of Representatives.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kennedy, and Mrs. 
        Clinton):
  S. 921. A bill to provide for secondary school reform, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce a bill 
with Senators Durbin, Kennedy, and Clinton that will help our Nation's 
high school students graduate with the knowledge necessary to succeed 
in post-secondary education and the skills needed to succeed in the 
workforce.
  Unfortunately too many high school students today are not completing 
high school at all or with the skills necessary to enter post-secondary 
education or the workforce. The statistics are staggering. Every day, 
3,000 teenagers drop out of high school. This year over 500,000 
students will drop out of high school. Overall, less than 70 percent of 
high school students will graduate and less than 50 percent of high 
school students of color will graduate.
  Of 100 9th graders, less than 70 percent will graduate on time, only 
38 percent will directly enter college, only 26 percent will still be 
enrolled in their sophomore year, and only 18 percent will graduate 
from college. That number is even lower for minority students. Forty 
percent of students entering 4-year colleges and nearly 70 percent of 
students entering community colleges will take remedial classes in 
reading, writing or math, extending their years in and the cost of 
college.
  Only one-third of the U.S. workforce has any post-secondary education 
but it is estimated that 60 percent of new jobs in the 21st century 
will require a post-secondary education. Business will spend billions 
of dollars on remediation for their employees in reading, writing and 
math.
  We can do better and we must do better for our Nation's students, 
their families, and American business. Currently, high school students 
are graduating at meager rates and even if they are graduating from 
high school, they are not leaving high school with the skills and 
knowledge to enter the workforce or be successful in college. That is 
why I have written and am introducing the Pathways for All Students to 
Succeed Act or the PASS Act.
  The PASS Act targets high school reform in three key areas: core 
academics, improving graduation rates, and assistance to low-performing 
schools to improve student achievement through innovative models. The 
PASS Act will help improve student achievement in core academics and 
reduce the need for remediation in college and the workplace through 
grants for schools to hire literacy and math coaches. Literacy and math 
coaches bring professional development back into schools and 
classrooms. Coaches help teachers identify which students are having 
reading or math problems, how to respond to such problems, and how to 
integrate literacy and math skills across curricula.
  The PASS Act also targets dropouts and low graduation rates through 
grants for academic counselors and a meaningful graduation rate 
calculation. Time after time I have talked to students in their senior 
year who have said, ``I didn't know I needed four years of math to 
graduate and get into college.'' Part of the problem is that our 
counselors are completely overwhelmed. The current national average 
ratio of students to counselors is over 450 to 1. My bill would provide 
grants to bring that ratio down to 150 to 1. Academic counselors will 
also work with students and their families to create 6 year graduation 
and career plans that will help students identify what classes they 
need to graduate and achieve their post-secondary goals, whether those 
goals are training or college, and identify support services such as 
GEAR UP and TRIO that are available to the student.
  The PASS Act also provides grants to schools for data collection, and 
specifically on graduation rates. Currently schools do not have a way 
to accurately calculate graduation rates. The Department of Education 
only requires schools to report the graduation rate based on 12th grade 
data and we all know that is not when students drop out. The PASS Act 
provides schools with funding to collect, disaggregate, and report 
accurate graduation rates so that schools can correctly diagnose and 
address problems facing specific student populations.
  And lastly the PASS Act provides additional funding for schools 
labeled ``in need of improvement'' to implement proven, innovative 
reforms leading to gains in student achievement. I often talk to 
principals who tell me they know what they need to do to improve

[[Page 7935]]

their schools; they just don't have the funds to make the necessary 
changes. Such reforms include smaller learning communities, adolescent 
literacy programs, whole school reforms, personalized learning 
environments, and programs that target transitions between middle and 
secondary school.
  Congress must act now and act boldly to correct the shortfalls in our 
nation's high schools. We can and must do better. I hope my colleagues 
will join me in supporting this bill and addressing the needs of our 
high school students.
  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. 921

       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 ``Pathways for All Students to 
     Succeed Act''.

          TITLE I--READING AND MATHEMATICS SKILLS FOR SUCCESS

     SEC. 101. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) While the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), as amended by the No Child 
     Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425), 
     provides a strong framework for helping children in the early 
     grades, our Nation still needs a comprehensive strategy to 
     address the literacy problems and learning gaps of students 
     in middle school and secondary school.
       (2) Approximately 60 percent of students in the poorest 
     communities fail to graduate from secondary school on time, 
     in large part because of severe reading deficits that 
     contribute to academic failure.
       (3) Forty percent of students attending high minority 
     enrollment secondary schools enroll in remedial reading 
     coursework when entering higher education, in an effort to 
     gain the skills their secondary education failed to provide.
       (4) While 33 percent of all low-income students are 
     enrolled in secondary schools, only 15 percent of the funding 
     targeted to disadvantaged students goes to secondary schools.
       (5) Data from the 1998 National Assessment of Educational 
     Progress show that 32 percent of boys and 19 percent of girls 
     in eighth grade cannot read at a basic level. These numbers 
     do not change significantly in the secondary school years and 
     are even more dramatic when students are identified by 
     minority status.
       (6) The 2002 National Assessment of Educational Progress 
     writing scores indicate that while the percentage of fourth 
     and eighth graders writing at or above a basic level 
     increased between 1998 and 2002, the percentage of 12th 
     graders writing at or above a basic level decreased. These 
     numbers show that our concentrated efforts for elementary 
     school students have improved their writing skills, but by 
     neglecting the needs of secondary school students, we are 
     squandering these gains.
       (7) The United States cannot maintain its position as the 
     world's strongest economy if we continue to ignore the 
     literacy needs of adolescents in middle school and secondary 
     school.
       (8) The achievement gap between White and Asian students 
     and Black and Hispanic students remains wide in the area of 
     mathematics.
       (9) The 2003 National Assessment of Education Progress 
     shows that the achievement gap between the mathematics scores 
     of eighth grade Black and Hispanic students and White 
     students is the same in 2003 as in 1990.
       (10) The 2003 National Assessment of Education Progress 
     shows that eighth grade students eligible for a free or 
     reduced-price school lunch did not meet the basic mathematics 
     score, unlike non-eligible students.
       (11) According to the latest results from international 
     assessments, 15-year-olds from the United States performed 
     below the international average in mathematics literacy and 
     problem-solving, placing 27th out of 39 countries.
       (12) Only 13 of the United States workforce has any post-
     secondary education, yet 60 percent of new jobs in the 21st 
     century will require post-secondary education.

     SEC. 102. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this title are--
       (1) to provide assistance to State educational agencies and 
     local educational agencies in establishing effective 
     research-based reading, writing, and mathematics programs for 
     students in middle schools and secondary schools, including 
     students with disabilities and students with limited English 
     proficiency;
       (2) to provide adequate resources to schools to hire and to 
     provide in-service training for not less than 1 literacy 
     coach per 20 teachers who can assist middle school and 
     secondary school teachers to incorporate research-based 
     reading and writing instruction into the teachers' teaching 
     of mathematics, science, history, civics, geography, 
     literature, language arts, and other core academic subjects;
       (3) to provide assistance to State educational agencies and 
     local educational agencies--
       (A) in strengthening reading and writing instruction in 
     middle schools and secondary schools; and
       (B) in procuring high-quality diagnostic reading and 
     writing assessments and comprehensive research-based programs 
     and instructional materials that will improve reading and 
     writing performance among students in middle school and 
     secondary school; and
       (4) to provide adequate resources to schools to hire and to 
     provide in-service training for not less than 1 mathematics 
     coach per 20 teachers who can assist middle school and 
     secondary school teachers to utilize research-based 
     mathematics instruction to develop students' mathematical 
     abilities and knowledge, and assist teachers in assessing 
     student learning.

     SEC. 103. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) In general.--The terms ``local educational agency'', 
     ``Secretary'', and ``State educational agency'' have the 
     meaning given the terms in section 9101 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       (2) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible 
     local educational agency'' means a local educational agency 
     who is eligible to receive funds under part A of title I of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311 et seq.).
       (3) Literacy coach.--The term ``literacy coach'' means a 
     certified or licensed teacher with a demonstrated 
     effectiveness in teaching reading and writing to students 
     with specialized reading and writing needs, and the ability 
     to work with classroom teachers to improve the teachers' 
     instructional techniques to support reading and writing 
     improvement, who works on site at a school--
       (A) to train teachers from across the curriculum to 
     incorporate the teaching of reading and writing skills into 
     their instruction of content;
       (B) to train teachers to assess students' reading and 
     writing skills and identify students requiring remediation; 
     and
       (C) to provide or assess remedial literacy instruction, 
     including for--
       (i) students in after school and summer school programs;
       (ii) students requiring additional instruction;
       (iii) students with disabilities; and
       (iv) students with limited English proficiency.
       (4) Mathematics coach.--The term ``mathematics coach'' 
     means a certified or licensed teacher, with a demonstrated 
     effectiveness in teaching mathematics to students with 
     specialized needs in mathematics, a command of mathematical 
     content knowledge, and the ability to work with classroom 
     teachers to improve the teachers' instructional techniques to 
     support mathematics improvement, who works on site at a 
     school--
       (A) to train teachers to better assess student learning in 
     mathematics;
       (B) to train teachers to assess students' mathematics 
     skills and identify students requiring remediation; and
       (C) to provide or assess remedial mathematics instruction, 
     including for--
       (i) students in after school and summer school programs;
       (ii) students requiring additional instruction;
       (iii) students with disabilities; and
       (iv) students with limited English proficiency.
       (5) Middle school.--The term ``middle school'' means a 
     school that provides middle school education, as determined 
     under State law.
       (6) Secondary school.--The term ``secondary school'' means 
     a school that provides secondary education, as determined 
     under State law.
       (7) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States, 
     the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 
     the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and 
     the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

     SEC. 104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Literacy Grants.--For the purposes of carrying out 
     subtitle A, there are authorized to be appropriated 
     $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
       (b) Mathematics Grants.--For the purposes of carrying out 
     subtitle B, there are authorized to be appropriated 
     $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

                  Subtitle A--Literacy Skills Programs

     SEC. 111. LITERACY SKILLS PROGRAMS.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--
       (1) In general.--From funds appropriated under section 
     104(a) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall establish a 
     program, in accordance with the requirements of this 
     subtitle, that will provide grants to State educational

[[Page 7936]]

     agencies, and grants or subgrants to eligible local 
     educational agencies, to establish reading and writing 
     programs to improve the overall reading and writing 
     performance of students in middle school and secondary 
     school.
       (2) Length of grant.--A grant to a State educational agency 
     under this subtitle shall be awarded for a period of 6 years.
       (b) Reservation of Funds by the Secretary.--From amounts 
     appropriated under section 104(a) for a fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall reserve--
       (1) 3 percent of such amounts to fund national activities 
     in support of the programs assisted under this subtitle, such 
     as research and dissemination of best practices, except that 
     the Secretary may not use the reserved funds to award grants 
     directly to local educational agencies; and
       (2) 2 percent of such amounts for the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs to carry out the services and activities described in 
     section 112(c) for Indian children.
       (c) Grant Formulas.--
       (1) Formula grants to state educational agencies.--If the 
     amounts appropriated under section 104(a) for a fiscal year 
     are equal to or greater than $500,000,000, then the Secretary 
     shall award grants, from allotments under paragraph (3), to 
     State educational agencies to enable the State educational 
     agencies to provide subgrants to eligible local educational 
     agencies to establish reading and writing programs to improve 
     overall reading and writing performance among students in 
     middle school and secondary school.
       (2) Direct grants to eligible local educational agencies.--
       (A) In general.--If the amounts appropriated under section 
     104(a) for a fiscal year are less than $500,000,000, then the 
     Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive basis, 
     directly to eligible local educational agencies to establish 
     reading and writing programs to improve overall reading and 
     writing performance among students in middle school and 
     secondary school.
       (B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in 
     awarding grants under this paragraph to eligible local 
     educational agencies that--
       (i) are among the local educational agencies in the State 
     with the lowest graduation rates, as described in section 
     1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)); and
       (ii) have the highest number or percentage of students who 
     are counted under section 1124(c) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)).
       (3) Allotments to states.--
       (A) In general.--From funds appropriated under section 
     104(a) and not reserved under subsection (b) for a fiscal 
     year, the Secretary shall make an allotment to each State 
     educational agency having an application approved under 
     subsection (d) in an amount that bears the same relation to 
     the funds as the amount the State received under part A of 
     title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) bears to the amount received under 
     such part by all States.
       (B) Minimum allotment.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), 
     no State educational agency shall receive an allotment under 
     this paragraph for a fiscal year in an amount that is less 
     than 0.25 percent of the funds allotted to all State 
     educational agencies under subparagraph (A) for the fiscal 
     year.
       (4) Reallotment.--If a State educational agency does not 
     apply for a grant under this subtitle, the Secretary shall 
     reallot the State educational agency's allotment to the 
     remaining States.
       (d) Applications.--
       (1) In general.--In order to receive a grant under this 
     subtitle, a State educational agency shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, 
     and accompanied by such information as the Secretary may 
     require. Each such application shall meet the following 
     conditions:
       (A) A State educational agency shall not include the 
     application for assistance under this subtitle in a 
     consolidated application submitted under section 9302 of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     7842).
       (B) The State educational agency's application shall 
     include an assurance that--
       (i) the State educational agency has established a reading 
     and writing partnership that--

       (I) coordinated the development of the application for a 
     grant under this subtitle; and
       (II) will assist in designing and administering the State 
     educational agency's program under this subtitle; and

       (ii) the State educational agency will participate, if 
     requested, in any evaluation of the State educational 
     agency's program under this subtitle.
       (C) The State educational agency's application shall 
     include a program plan that contains a description of the 
     following:
       (i) How the State educational agency will assist eligible 
     local educational agencies in implementing subgrants, 
     including providing ongoing professional development for 
     literacy coaches, teachers, paraprofessionals, and 
     administrators.
       (ii) How the State educational agency will help eligible 
     local educational agencies identify high-quality screening, 
     diagnostic, and classroom-based instructional reading and 
     writing assessments.
       (iii) How the State educational agency will help eligible 
     local educational agencies identify high-quality research-
     based materials and programs.
       (iv) How the State educational agency will help eligible 
     local educational agencies identify appropriate and effective 
     materials, programs, and assessments for students with 
     disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.
       (v) How the State educational agency will ensure that 
     professional development funded under this subtitle--

       (I) is based on reading and writing research;
       (II) will effectively improve instructional practices for 
     reading and writing for middle school and secondary school 
     students; and
       (III) is coordinated with professional development 
     activities funded through other programs (including federally 
     funded programs such as programs funded under the Adult 
     Education and Family Literacy Act (20 U.S.C. 9201 et seq.), 
     the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 
     1400 et seq.), and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.)).

       (vi) How funded activities will help teachers and other 
     instructional staff to implement research-based components of 
     reading and writing instruction.
       (vii) The subgrant process the State educational agency 
     will use to ensure that eligible local educational agencies 
     receiving subgrants implement programs and practices based on 
     reading and writing research.
       (viii) How the State educational agency will build on and 
     promote coordination among reading and writing programs in 
     the State to increase overall effectiveness in improving 
     reading and writing instruction, including for students with 
     disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.
       (ix) How the State educational agency will regularly assess 
     and evaluate the effectiveness of the eligible local 
     educational agency activities funded under this subtitle.
       (2) Review of applications.--The Secretary shall review 
     applications from State educational agencies under this 
     subsection as the applications are received.
       (e) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this subtitle shall--
       (1) establish a reading and writing partnership, which may 
     be the same as the partnership established under section 
     1203(d) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 6363(d)), that will provide guidance to eligible 
     local educational agencies in selecting or developing and 
     implementing appropriate, research-based reading and writing 
     programs for middle school and secondary school students;
       (2) use 80 percent of the grant funds received under this 
     subtitle for a fiscal year to award subgrants to eligible 
     local educational agencies having applications approved under 
     section 112(a); and
       (3) use 20 percent of the grant funds received under this 
     subtitle--
       (A) to carry out State-level activities described in the 
     application submitted under subsection (d);
       (B) to provide--
       (i) technical assistance to eligible local educational 
     agencies; and
       (ii) high-quality professional development to teachers and 
     literacy coaches;
       (C) to oversee and evaluate subgrant services and 
     activities undertaken by the eligible local educational 
     agencies as described in section 112(c); and
       (D) for administrative costs,

     of which not more than 10 percent of the grant funds may be 
     used for planning, administration, and reporting.
       (f) Notice to Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--Each 
     State educational agency receiving a grant under this 
     subtitle shall provide notice to all eligible local 
     educational agencies in the State about the availability of 
     subgrants under this subtitle.
       (g) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each State educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this subtitle shall use the grant 
     funds to supplement not supplant State funding for activities 
     authorized under this subtitle or for other educational 
     activities.
       (h) New Services and Activities.--Grant funds provided 
     under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and 
     activities authorized under this subtitle that were not 
     provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 112. SUBGRANTS TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

       (a) Application.--
       (1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency 
     desiring a subgrant under this subtitle shall submit an 
     application to the State educational agency in the form and 
     according to the schedule established by the State 
     educational agency.
       (2) Contents.--In addition to any information required by 
     the State educational agency, each application under 
     paragraph (1) shall demonstrate how the eligible local 
     educational agency will carry out the following required 
     activities:
       (A) Development or selection and implementation of 
     research-based reading and writing assessments.

[[Page 7937]]

       (B) Development or selection and implementation of 
     research-based reading and writing programs, including 
     programs for students with disabilities and students with 
     limited English proficiency.
       (C) Selection of instructional materials based on reading 
     and writing research.
       (D) High-quality professional development for literacy 
     coaches and teachers based on reading and writing research.
       (E) Evaluation strategies.
       (F) Reporting.
       (G) Providing access to research-based reading and writing 
     materials.
       (3) Consortia.--An eligible local educational agency may 
     apply to the State educational agency for a subgrant as a 
     member of a consortium, if each member of the consortium is 
     an eligible local educational agency.
       (b) Award Basis.--
       (1) Minimum subgrant amount.--Each eligible local 
     educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle 
     for a fiscal year shall receive a minimum subgrant amount 
     that bears the same relation to the amount of funds made 
     available to the State educational agency under section 
     111(e)(2) as the amount the eligible local educational agency 
     received under part A of title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for 
     the preceding fiscal year bears to the amount received by all 
     eligible local educational agencies under such part for the 
     preceding fiscal year.
       (2) Sufficient size and scope.--Subgrants under this 
     section shall be of sufficient size and scope to enable 
     eligible local educational agencies to fully implement 
     activities assisted under this subtitle.
       (c) Local Use of Funds.--Each eligible local educational 
     agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle shall use the 
     subgrant funds to carry out, at the middle school and 
     secondary school level, the following services and 
     activities:
       (1) Hiring literacy coaches, at a ratio of not less than 1 
     literacy coach for every 20 teachers, and providing 
     professional development for literacy coaches--
       (A) to work with classroom teachers to incorporate reading 
     and writing instruction within all subject areas, during 
     regular classroom periods, after school, and during summer 
     school programs, for all students;
       (B) to work with classroom teachers to identify students 
     with reading and writing problems and, where appropriate, 
     refer students to available programs for remediation and 
     additional services;
       (C) to work with classroom teachers to diagnose and 
     remediate reading and writing difficulties of the lowest-
     performing students, by providing intensive, research-based 
     instruction, including during after school and summer 
     sessions, geared toward ensuring that the students can access 
     and be successful in rigorous academic coursework; and
       (D) to assess and organize student data on literacy and 
     communicate that data to school administrators to inform 
     school reform efforts.
       (2) Reviewing, analyzing, developing, and, where possible, 
     adapting curricula to make sure literacy skills are taught 
     within the content area subjects.
       (3) Providing reading and writing professional development 
     for all teachers in middle school and secondary school that 
     addresses both remedial and higher level literacy skills for 
     students in the applicable curriculum.
       (4) Providing professional development for teachers, 
     administrators, and paraprofessionals serving middle schools 
     and secondary schools to help the teachers, administrators, 
     and paraprofessionals meet literacy needs.
       (5) Procuring and implementing programs and instructional 
     materials based on reading and writing research, including 
     software and other education technology related to reading 
     and writing instruction.
       (6) Building on and promoting coordination among reading 
     and writing programs in the eligible local educational agency 
     to increase overall effectiveness in improving reading and 
     writing instruction, including for students with disabilities 
     and students with limited English proficiency.
       (7) Evaluating the effectiveness of the instructional 
     strategies, teacher professional development programs, and 
     other interventions that are implemented under the subgrant.
       (d) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each eligible local 
     educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle 
     shall use the subgrant funds to supplement not supplant the 
     eligible local educational agency funding for activities 
     authorized under this subtitle or for other educational 
     activities.
       (e) New Services and Activities.--Subgrant funds provided 
     under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and 
     activities authorized under this subtitle that were not 
     provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (f) Evaluations.--Each eligible local educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this subtitle shall participate, as 
     requested by the State educational agency or the Secretary, 
     in reviews and evaluations of the programs of the eligible 
     local educational agency and the effectiveness of such 
     programs, and shall provide such reports as are requested by 
     the State educational agency and the Secretary.

                Subtitle B--Mathematics Skills Programs

     SEC. 121. MATHEMATICS SKILLS PROGRAMS.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--
       (1) In general.--From funds appropriated under section 
     104(b) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall establish a 
     program, in accordance with the requirements of this 
     subtitle, that will provide grants to State educational 
     agencies, and grants and subgrants to eligible local 
     educational agencies, to establish mathematics programs to 
     improve the overall mathematics performance of students in 
     middle school and secondary school.
       (2) Length of grant.--A grant to a State educational agency 
     under this subtitle shall be awarded for a period of 6 years.
       (b) Reservation of Funds by the Secretary.--From amounts 
     appropriated under section 104(b) for a fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall reserve--
       (1) 3 percent of such amounts to fund national activities 
     in support of the programs assisted under this subtitle, such 
     as research and dissemination of best practices, except that 
     the Secretary may not use the reserved funds to award grants 
     directly to local educational agencies; and
       (2) 2 percent of such amounts for the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs to carry out the services and activities described in 
     section 122(c) for Indian children.
       (c) Grant Formulas.--
       (1) Formula grants to state educational agencies.--If the 
     amounts appropriated under section 104(b) for a fiscal year 
     are equal to or greater than $500,000,000, then the Secretary 
     shall award grants, from allotments under paragraph (3), to 
     State educational agencies to enable the State educational 
     agencies to provide subgrants to eligible local educational 
     agencies to establish mathematics programs to improve overall 
     mathematics performance among students in middle school and 
     secondary school.
       (2) Direct grants to eligible local educational agencies.--
       (A) In general.--If the amounts appropriated under section 
     104(b) for a fiscal year are less than $500,000,000, then the 
     Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive basis, 
     directly to eligible local educational agencies to establish 
     mathematics programs to improve overall mathematics 
     performance among students in middle school and secondary 
     school.
       (B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in 
     awarding grants under this paragraph to eligible local 
     educational agencies that--
       (i) are among the local educational agencies in the State 
     with the lowest graduation rates, as described in section 
     1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)); and
       (ii) have the highest number or percentage of students who 
     are counted under section 1124(c) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)).
       (3) Allotments to states.--
       (A) In general.--From funds appropriated under section 
     104(b) and not reserved under subsection (b) for a fiscal 
     year, the Secretary shall make an allotment to each State 
     educational agency having an application approved under 
     subsection (d) in an amount that bears the same relation to 
     the funds as the amount the State received under part A of 
     title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) bears to the amount received under 
     such part by all States.
       (B) Minimum allotment.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), 
     no State educational agency shall receive an allotment under 
     this paragraph for a fiscal year in an amount that is less 
     than 0.25 percent of the funds allotted to all State 
     educational agencies under subparagraph (A) for the fiscal 
     year.
       (4) Reallotment.--If a State educational agency does not 
     apply for a grant under this subtitle, the Secretary shall 
     reallot the State educational agency's allotment to the 
     remaining States.
       (d) Applications.--
       (1) In general.--In order to receive a grant under this 
     subtitle, a State educational agency shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, 
     and accompanied by such information as the Secretary may 
     require. Each such application shall meet the following 
     conditions:
       (A) A State educational agency shall not include the 
     application for assistance under this subtitle in a 
     consolidated application submitted under section 9302 of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     7842).
       (B) The State educational agency's application shall 
     include an assurance that--
       (i) the State educational agency has established a 
     mathematics partnership that--

       (I) coordinated the development of the application for a 
     grant under this subtitle; and
       (II) will assist in designing and administering the State 
     educational agency's program under this subtitle; and

       (ii) the State educational agency will participate, if 
     requested, in any evaluation of the State educational 
     agency's program under this subtitle.
       (C) The State educational agency's application shall 
     include a program plan that contains a description of the 
     following:
       (i) How the State educational agency will assist eligible 
     local educational agencies in

[[Page 7938]]

     implementing subgrants, including providing ongoing 
     professional development for mathematics coaches, teachers, 
     paraprofessionals, and administrators.
       (ii) How the State educational agency will help eligible 
     local educational agencies identify high-quality screening, 
     diagnostic, and classroom-based instructional mathematics 
     assessments.
       (iii) How the State educational agency will help eligible 
     local educational agencies identify high-quality research-
     based mathematics materials and programs.
       (iv) How the State educational agency will help eligible 
     local educational agencies identify appropriate and effective 
     materials, programs, and assessments for students with 
     disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.
       (v) How the State educational agency will ensure that 
     professional development funded under this subtitle--

       (I) is based on mathematics research;
       (II) will effectively improve instructional practices for 
     mathematics for middle school and secondary school students; 
     and
       (III) is coordinated with professional development 
     activities funded through other programs.

       (vi) How funded activities will help teachers and other 
     instructional staff to implement research-based components of 
     mathematics instruction.
       (vii) The subgrant process the State educational agency 
     will use to ensure that eligible local educational agencies 
     receiving subgrants implement programs and practices based on 
     mathematics research.
       (viii) How the State educational agency will build on and 
     promote coordination among mathematics programs in the State 
     to increase overall effectiveness in improving mathematics 
     instruction, including for students with disabilities and 
     students with limited English proficiency.
       (ix) How the State educational agency will regularly assess 
     and evaluate the effectiveness of the eligible local 
     educational agency activities funded under this subtitle.
       (2) Review of applications.--The Secretary shall review 
     applications from State educational agencies under this 
     subsection as the applications are received.
       (e) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this subtitle shall--
       (1) establish a mathematics partnership that will provide 
     guidance to eligible local educational agencies in selecting 
     or developing and implementing appropriate, research-based 
     mathematics programs for middle school and secondary school 
     students;
       (2) use 80 percent of the grant funds received under this 
     subtitle for a fiscal year to approve high-quality 
     applications for subgrants to eligible local educational 
     agencies having applications approved under section 122(a); 
     and
       (3) use 20 percent of the grant funds received under this 
     subtitle--
       (A) to carry out State-level activities described in the 
     application submitted under subsection (d);
       (B) to provide--
       (i) technical assistance to eligible local educational 
     agencies; and
       (ii) high-quality professional development to teachers and 
     mathematics coaches;
       (C) to oversee and evaluate subgrant services and 
     activities undertaken by the eligible local educational 
     agencies as described in section 122(c); and
       (D) for administrative costs,
     of which not more than 10 percent of the grant funds may be 
     used for planning, administration, and reporting.
       (f) Notice to Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--Each 
     State educational agency receiving a grant under this 
     subtitle shall provide notice to all eligible local 
     educational agencies in the State about the availability of 
     subgrants under this subtitle.
       (g) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each State educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this subtitle shall use the grant 
     funds to supplement not supplant State funding for activities 
     authorized under this subtitle or for other educational 
     activities.
       (h) New Services and Activities.--Grant funds provided 
     under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and 
     activities authorized under this subtitle that were not 
     provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 122. SUBGRANTS TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

       (a) Application.--
       (1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency 
     desiring a subgrant under this subtitle shall submit an 
     application to the State educational agency in the form and 
     according to the schedule established by the State 
     educational agency.
       (2) Contents.--In addition to any information required by 
     the State educational agency, each application under 
     paragraph (1) shall demonstrate how the eligible local 
     educational agency will carry out the following required 
     activities:
       (A) Development or selection and implementation of 
     research-based mathematics assessments.
       (B) Development or selection and implementation of 
     research-based mathematics programs, including programs for 
     students with disabilities and students with limited English 
     proficiency.
       (C) Selection of instructional materials based on 
     mathematics research.
       (D) High-quality professional development for mathematics 
     coaches and teachers based on mathematics research.
       (E) Evaluation strategies.
       (F) Reporting.
       (G) Providing access to research-based mathematics 
     materials.
       (3) Consortia.--An eligible local educational agency may 
     apply to the State educational agency for a subgrant as a 
     member of a consortium if each member of the consortium is an 
     eligible local educational agency.
       (b) Award Basis.--
       (1) Minimum subgrant amount.--Each eligible local 
     educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle 
     for a fiscal year shall receive a minimum subgrant amount 
     that bears the same relation to the amount of funds made 
     available to the State educational agency under section 
     121(e)(2) as the amount the eligible local educational agency 
     received under part A of title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for 
     the preceding fiscal year bears to the amount received by all 
     eligible local educational agencies under such part for the 
     preceding fiscal year.
       (2) Sufficient size and scope.--Subgrants under this 
     section shall be of sufficient size and scope to enable 
     eligible local educational agencies to fully implement 
     activities assisted under this subtitle.
       (c) Local Use of Funds.--Each eligible local educational 
     agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle shall use the 
     subgrant funds to carry out, at the middle school and 
     secondary school level, the following services and 
     activities:
       (1) Hiring mathematics coaches, at a ratio of not less than 
     1 mathematics coach for every 20 teachers, and providing 
     professional development for mathematics coaches--
       (A) to work with classroom teachers to better assess 
     student learning in mathematics;
       (B) to work with classroom teachers to identify students 
     with mathematics problems and, where appropriate, refer 
     students to available programs for remediation and additional 
     services;
       (C) to work with classroom teachers to diagnose and 
     remediate mathematics difficulties of the lowest-performing 
     students, by providing intensive, research-based instruction, 
     including during after school and summer sessions, geared 
     toward ensuring that those students can access and be 
     successful in rigorous academic coursework; and
       (D) to assess and organize student data on mathematics and 
     communicate that data to school administrators to inform 
     school reform efforts.
       (2) Reviewing, analyzing, developing, and, where possible, 
     adapting curricula to make sure mathematics skills are taught 
     within the content area subjects.
       (3) Providing mathematics professional development for all 
     teachers in middle school and secondary school that addresses 
     both remedial and higher level mathematics skills for 
     students in the applicable curriculum.
       (4) Providing professional development for teachers, 
     administrators, and paraprofessionals serving middle schools 
     and secondary schools to help the teachers, administrators, 
     and paraprofessionals meet mathematics needs.
       (5) Procuring and implementing programs and instructional 
     materials based on mathematics research, including software 
     and other education technology related to mathematics 
     instruction.
       (6) Building on and promoting coordination among 
     mathematics programs in the eligible local educational agency 
     to increase overall effectiveness in improving mathematics 
     instruction, including for students with disabilities and 
     students with limited English proficiency.
       (7) Evaluating the effectiveness of the instructional 
     strategies, teacher professional development programs, and 
     other interventions that are implemented under the subgrant.
       (d) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each eligible local 
     educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle 
     shall use the subgrant funds to supplement not supplant the 
     eligible local educational agency funding for activities 
     authorized under this subtitle or for other educational 
     activities.
       (e) New Services and Activities.--Subgrant funds provided 
     under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and 
     activities authorized under this subtitle that were not 
     provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (f) Evaluations.--Each eligible local educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this subtitle shall participate, as 
     requested by the State educational agency or the Secretary, 
     in reviews and evaluations of the programs of the eligible 
     local educational agency and the effectiveness of such 
     programs, and shall provide such reports as are requested by 
     the State educational agency and the Secretary.

                     TITLE II--PATHWAYS TO SUCCESS

     SEC. 201. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) In 2003, approximately 60 percent of students in the 
     poorest communities failed to graduate from secondary school 
     on time.

[[Page 7939]]

       (2) All ninth grade students should have a plan that 
     assesses the student's instructional needs and outlines the 
     coursework the student must complete to graduate on time, 
     properly prepared for college and career.
       (3) Research shows that 1 of the most important factors 
     behind student success in secondary school is a close 
     connection with at least 1 adult who demonstrates concern for 
     the student's advancement.
       (4) Secondary school counselors can help students receive 
     the instructional, tutorial, and social supports that 
     contribute to academic success.
       (5) Model programs around the Nation have demonstrated that 
     effective academic and support plans for students, developed 
     by counselors serving as academic coaches, in cooperation 
     with students and parents, result in a higher percentage of 
     students graduating from secondary school well prepared for 
     college study.

     SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) In general.--The terms ``local educational agency'', 
     ``poverty line'', ``secondary school'', ``Secretary'', and 
     ``State educational agency'' have the meaning given the terms 
     in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       (2) Academic counselor.--The term ``academic counselor'' 
     means a highly qualified professional who has received 
     professional development appropriate to perform the services 
     described in section 205(c).
       (3) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible 
     local educational agency'' means a local educational agency 
     who has jurisdiction over not less than 1 secondary school 
     receiving assistance under part A of title I of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311 et seq.).
       (4) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States, 
     the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 
     the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and 
     the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

     SEC. 203. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

       The Secretary is authorized to establish a program, in 
     accordance with the requirements of this title, that--
       (1) enables a secondary school that receives assistance 
     under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), to hire a sufficient number 
     of academic counselors, in a ratio of not less than 1 
     counselor to 150 students, to develop personal plans for each 
     student at the school, including students with limited 
     English proficiency;
       (2) involves parents in the development and implementation 
     of the personal plans; and
       (3) provides academic counselors and staff at the schools 
     receiving grants under this title the opportunity to 
     coordinate with other programs and services, including those 
     supported by Federal funds, to ensure that students have 
     access to the resources and services necessary to fulfill the 
     students' personal plans.

     SEC. 204. GRANTS TO STATES.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--From amounts made available under 
     section 206 and not reserved under subsection (i), the 
     Secretary shall award grants, from allotments under 
     subsection (b), to State educational agencies to enable the 
     State educational agencies to provide subgrants to eligible 
     local educational agencies to implement programs in secondary 
     schools in accordance with this title.
       (b) Allotments to States.--
       (1) In general.--From funds appropriated under section 206 
     and not reserved under subsection (i) for a fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall make an allotment to each State educational 
     agency having an application approved under subsection (d) in 
     an amount that bears the same relation to the funds as the 
     amount the State received under part A of title I of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311 et seq.) bears to the amount received under such part by 
     all States.
       (2) Minimum allotment.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), no 
     State educational agency shall receive an allotment under 
     this subsection for a fiscal year in an amount that is less 
     than 0.25 percent of the amount allotted to the State 
     educational agencies under subsection (e)(1) for the fiscal 
     year.
       (3) Ratable reductions.--If the amount appropriated to 
     carry out this title for any fiscal year is less than 
     $2,000,000,000, then the Secretary shall ratably reduce the 
     allotment made to each State educational agency under this 
     subsection in proportion to the relative number of children 
     who are counted under section 1124(c) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)), in the 
     State compared to such number for all States.
       (c) Length of Grants.--A grant to a State educational 
     agency under this title shall be awarded for a period of 6 
     years.
       (d) Applications.--In order to receive a grant under this 
     title, a State educational agency shall submit an application 
     to the Secretary in the form and according to the schedule 
     established by the Secretary by regulation.
       (e) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency 
     receiving a grant under this title shall use--
       (1) 80 percent of the grant funds to award subgrants to 
     eligible local educational agencies under section 205; and
       (2) 20 percent of the grant funds to provide professional 
     development to academic counselors and technical assistance 
     to local educational agencies, and to pay for administrative 
     costs, of which not more than 10 percent of such 20 percent 
     may be used for planning, administration, and reporting.
       (f) Supplement Not Supplant.--Grant funds provided to State 
     educational agencies under this title shall be used to 
     supplement not supplant funding provided by the State for 
     activities authorized under this title or for other 
     educational activities.
       (g) New Services and Activities.--Grant funds provided 
     under this title may be used only to provide services and 
     activities authorized under this title that were not provided 
     on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (h) Reallotment.--If a State educational agency does not 
     apply for funding under this title, the Secretary shall 
     reallot the State educational agency's allotment to the 
     remaining eligible State educational agencies.
       (i) Reservations.--Of the funds appropriated under section 
     206 for each fiscal year, the Secretary shall reserve--
       (1) 2 percent for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to carry out 
     the authorized activities described in section 205(c); and
       (2) 3 percent for national activities that support the 
     programs assisted under this title, except that the Secretary 
     shall not use such reserved funds to award grants directly to 
     local educational agencies.

     SEC. 205. SUBGRANTS TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

       (a) Subgrants Authorized.--From amounts made available 
     under section 204(e)(1), a State educational agency shall 
     award subgrants to eligible local educational agencies having 
     applications approved under subsection (b) to enable the 
     eligible local educational agencies to carry out the 
     authorized activities described in subsection (c).
       (b) Applications.--
       (1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency 
     desiring a subgrant under this title shall submit an 
     application to the State educational agency in the form and 
     according to the schedule established by the State 
     educational agency. Each such application shall describe how 
     the eligible local educational agency will--
       (A) hire a sufficient number of highly qualified academic 
     counselors to develop personal plans for all students in such 
     students' first year of secondary school, with a ratio of 1 
     academic counselor to not more than 150 students in each 
     secondary school served under the subgrant;
       (B) provide adequate resources to each such school to offer 
     the supplemental and other support services that the 
     implementation of students' personal plans require, and 
     provide such supplemental services, where possible, through 
     coordination with Federal TRIO programs under chapter 1 of 
     subpart 2 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 et seq.), Gear Up programs under 
     chapter 2 of such subpart (20 U.S.C. 1070a-21 et seq.), 
     programs under title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), 21st Century 
     Community Learning Centers under part B of title IV of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     7171 et seq.), programs under the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) (in 
     accordance with students' individualized education programs), 
     and programs under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and 
     Technical Education Act of 1998 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.);
       (C) include parents in the development and implementation 
     of students' personal plans; and
       (D) provide staff at each such school with opportunities 
     for appropriate professional development and coordination to 
     help the staff support students in implementing the students' 
     personal plans.
       (2) Consortia.--An eligible local educational agency may 
     apply to the State educational agency for a subgrant as a 
     consortium, if each member of the consortium is an eligible 
     local educational agency.
       (c) Authorized Activities.--Each eligible local educational 
     agency receiving a subgrant under this title shall use the 
     subgrant funds to provide the following services:
       (1) Hiring academic counselors (at a ratio of not less than 
     1 counselor per 150 students) to develop the 6-year personal 
     plans for all students in such students' first year of 
     secondary school and coordinate the services required to 
     implement such personal plans. Such academic counselors 
     shall--
       (A) work with students and their families to develop an 
     individual plan that will define such students' career and 
     education goals, assure enrollment in the coursework 
     necessary for on-time graduation and preparation for career 
     development or postsecondary education, and identify the 
     courses and supplemental services necessary to meet those 
     goals;
       (B) advocate for students, helping the students to access 
     the services and supports necessary to achieve the goals laid 
     out in the personal plan for the student;

[[Page 7940]]

       (C) assure student access to services, both academic and 
     nonacademic, needed to lower barriers to succeed as needed;
       (D) assess student progress on a regular basis;
       (E) work with school and eligible local educational agency 
     administrators to promote reforms based on student needs and 
     performance data;
       (F) involve parents or caregivers, including those parents 
     or caregivers who are limited English proficient, and 
     teachers, in the development of students' personal plans to 
     ensure the support and assistance of the parents, caregivers, 
     and teachers in meeting the goals outlined in such personal 
     plans; and
       (G) communicate to students and their families the 
     importance of implementing the 2 years of the personal plan 
     following secondary school graduation, and work with 
     institutions of higher education to help students transition 
     successfully and fully implement the students' personal 
     plans.
       (2) Determining the academic needs of all students entering 
     grade 9 and identifying barriers to success.
       (3) Ensuring availability of the services necessary for the 
     implementation of students' personal plans, including access 
     to a college preparatory curriculum and advanced placement or 
     international baccalaureate courses.
       (4) Where appropriate, modifying the curriculum at a 
     secondary school receiving subgrant funds under this title to 
     address the instructional requirements of students' personal 
     plans.
       (5) Providing for the ongoing assessment of students for 
     whom personal plans have been developed and modifying such 
     personal plans as necessary.
       (6) Coordinating the services offered with subgrant funds 
     received under this title with other Federal, State, and 
     local funds, including programs authorized under title I of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6301 et seq.), sections 402A and 404A of the Higher Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 and 1070a-21), the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 
     et seq.) (in accordance with students' individualized 
     education programs), and the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and 
     Technical Education Act of 1998 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.).
       (d) Eligible Local Educational Agency Priority.--In 
     awarding subgrants to eligible local educational agencies, a 
     State educational agency shall give priority to eligible 
     local educational agencies with--
       (1) the largest number or percentage of students in grades 
     6 through 12 reading below grade level; or
       (2) the lowest graduation rates as described in section 
     1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)).
       (e) School Priority.--In awarding sub-
     grant funds to secondary schools, an eligible local 
     educational agency shall give priority to secondary schools 
     that--
       (1) have the highest percentages or numbers of students in 
     grades 6 through 12 reading below grade level;
       (2) have the highest percentages or numbers of children 
     living below the poverty line according to census figures; or
       (3) have the lowest graduation rates as described in 
     section 1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)).
       (f) Minimum Subgrant Amount.--Each eligible local 
     educational agency receiving a subgrant under this title for 
     a fiscal year shall receive a minimum subgrant amount that 
     bears the same relation to the amount of funds made available 
     to the State educational agency under section 204(e)(1) as 
     the amount the eligible local educational agency received 
     under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the 
     preceding fiscal year bears to the amount received by all 
     eligible local educational agencies in the State under such 
     part for the preceding fiscal year.
       (g) Sufficient Size and Scope.--Subgrants under this 
     section shall be of sufficient size and scope to enable 
     eligible local educational agencies to fully implement 
     activities assisted under this title.
       (h) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each eligible local 
     educational agency receiving a subgrant under this section 
     shall use the subgrant funds to supplement not supplant 
     funding for activities authorized under this title or for 
     other educational activities.
       (i) New Services and Activities.--Subgrant funds provided 
     under this section may be used only to provide services and 
     activities authorized under this section that were not 
     provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 206. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       For the purposes of carrying out this title, there are 
     authorized to be appropriated $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2006 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 5 
     succeeding fiscal years.

           TITLE III--FOSTERING SUCCESSFUL SECONDARY SCHOOLS

     SEC. 301. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Personalization of the school environment has been 
     proven to be an essential factor in helping low-performing 
     secondary school students succeed.
       (2) Effective schools provide ongoing, high-quality 
     professional development for teachers and administrators to 
     improve instruction.
       (3) Student success is dependent upon alignment of 
     curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
       (4) Successful schools adapt instruction to the unique 
     interests and talents of each student.
       (5) Successful schools have high expectations for all 
     students and offer a rigorous curriculum for the entire 
     student body.
       (6) Ongoing assessment is the best way to measure how each 
     student is learning and responding to the teacher's 
     instructional methods.
       (7) Effective secondary schools have access to, and 
     utilize, data related to student performance prior to, and 
     following, secondary school enrollment.
       (8) Despite significant increases to the program, only 
     about 7 percent of funding for title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) goes 
     to secondary schools.
       (9) Every year, 1,300,000 students do not graduate with 
     their peers, which means every school day, our Nation loses 
     7,000 students.
       (10) Nationally, of 100 ninth-graders, only 68 will 
     graduate from high school on time, only 38 will directly 
     enter college, only 26 will still be enrolled for the 
     sophomore year, and only 18 will end up graduating from 
     college. The numbers for minority students are even lower.
       (11) Even secondary school graduates going on to college 
     are struggling with basic literacy skills, with 40 percent of 
     all 4-year college students taking a remedial course and 63 
     percent of all community college students assigned to at 
     least 1 remedial course.

     SEC. 302. PURPOSES.

       It is the purpose of this title to implement research-based 
     programs, practices, and models that will improve student 
     achievement in low performing secondary schools.

     SEC. 303. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) In general.--The terms ``institution of higher 
     education'', ``local educational agency'', ``secondary 
     school'', ``Secretary'', and ``State educational agency'' 
     have the meanings given the terms in section 9101 of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     7801).
       (2) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible 
     local educational agency'' means a local educational agency 
     that has jurisdiction over not less than 1 eligible secondary 
     school.
       (3) Eligible partnership.--The term ``eligible 
     partnership'' means--
       (A) an eligible local educational agency in partnership 
     with a regional educational laboratory, an institution of 
     higher education, or another nonprofit institution with 
     significant experience in implementing and evaluating 
     education reforms; or
       (B) a consortium of eligible secondary schools or eligible 
     local educational agencies, each of which is an eligible 
     entity described in subparagraph (A).
       (4) Eligible secondary school.--The term ``eligible 
     secondary school'' means a secondary school identified for 
     school improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), as 
     of the day preceding the date of enactment of the Pathways 
     for All Students to Succeed Act.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin 
     Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands.

     SEC. 304. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED; AUTHORIZATION OF 
                   APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary is authorized to 
     award grants to State educational agencies, from allotments 
     under section 305(b), to enable the State educational 
     agencies to award subgrants to eligible local educational 
     agencies, from allocations under section 305(c)(2), to 
     promote secondary school improvement and student achievement.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this title $500,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for each 
     of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

     SEC. 305. RESERVATIONS, STATE ALLOTMENTS, AND LOCAL 
                   ALLOCATIONS.

       (a) Reservations.--From funds appropriated under section 
     304(b) for a fiscal year the Secretary shall reserve--
       (1) 2 percent for schools funded or supported by the Bureau 
     of Indian Affairs to carry out the purposes of this title for 
     Indian children;
       (2) 3 percent to carry out national activities in support 
     of the purposes of this title; and
       (3) 95 percent for allotment to the States in accordance 
     with subsection (b).
       (b) Allotment to States.--
       (1) In general.--From funds reserved under subsection 
     (a)(3) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall make an 
     allotment to each State educational agency in an amount that 
     bears the same relationship to the funds as the number of 
     schools in that State that have been identified for school 
     improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary and

[[Page 7941]]

     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), bears to 
     the number of schools in all States that have been identified 
     for school improvement under such section 1116(b).
       (2) Reallotment.--The portion of any State educational 
     agency's allotment that is not used by the State educational 
     agency shall be reallotted among the remaining State 
     educational agencies on the same basis as the original 
     allotments were made under paragraph (1).
       (c) Allocations to Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--
       (1) Reservations.--Each State educational agency receiving 
     a grant under this title shall reserve--
       (A) not more than 10 percent of the grant funds--
       (i) for State-level activities to provide high-quality 
     professional development and technical assistance to local 
     educational agencies receiving funds under this title and to 
     other local educational agencies as appropriate, including 
     the dissemination and implementation of research-based 
     programs, practices, and models for secondary school 
     improvement; and
       (ii) to contract for the evaluation of all programs and 
     activities in the State that are assisted under this title; 
     and
       (B) not less than 90 percent of the grant funds to award 
     subgrants to eligible local educational agencies to enable 
     the eligible local educational agencies to carry out the 
     activities described in section 306.
       (2) Local allocation.--From funds reserved under paragraph 
     (1)(B), the State educational agency shall allocate to each 
     eligible local educational agency in the State an amount that 
     bears the same relation to such funds as the number of 
     secondary schools that have been identified for school 
     improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), that are 
     served by the eligible local educational agency, bears to the 
     number of such schools served by all eligible local 
     educational agencies in the State.

     SEC. 306. LOCAL USES OF FUNDS.

       Each eligible local educational agency receiving a subgrant 
     under this title shall use the subgrant funds for activities 
     to improve secondary schools that have been identified for 
     school improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), such 
     as--
       (1) developing and implementing research-based programs or 
     models that have been shown to raise achievement among 
     secondary school students, including smaller learning 
     communities, adolescent literacy programs, block scheduling, 
     whole school reforms, individualized learning plans, 
     personalized learning environments, and strategies to target 
     students making the transition from middle school to 
     secondary school;
       (2) promoting community investment in school quality by 
     engaging parents, businesses, and community-based 
     organizations in the development of reform plans for eligible 
     secondary schools;
       (3) researching, developing, and implementing a school 
     district strategy to create smaller learning communities for 
     secondary school students, both by creating smaller learning 
     communities within existing secondary schools, and by 
     developing new, smaller, and more personalized secondary 
     schools;
       (4) providing professional development for school staff in 
     research-based practices, such as interactive instructional 
     strategies and opportunities to connect learning with 
     experience; and
       (5) providing professional development and leadership 
     training for principals and other school leaders in the best 
     practices of instructional leadership and implementing school 
     reforms to raise student achievement.

     SEC. 307. APPLICATIONS.

       (a) States.--Each State educational agency desiring a grant 
     under this title shall submit to the Secretary an application 
     at such time, in such manner, and containing such information 
     as the Secretary may require to ensure compliance with the 
     requirements of this title.
       (b) Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--Each eligible 
     local educational agency desiring a subgrant under this title 
     shall submit to the State educational agency an application 
     at such time, in such manner, and containing such information 
     as the State educational agency may require to ensure 
     compliance with the requirements of this title. Each such 
     application shall describe how the eligible local educational 
     agency will form an eligible partnership to carry out the 
     activities assisted under this title.

     SEC. 308. EVALUATIONS.

       In cooperation with the State educational agencies 
     receiving funds under this title, the Secretary shall 
     undertake or contract for a rigorous evaluation of the 
     effectiveness and success of activities conducted under this 
     title.

                        TITLE IV--DATA CAPACITY

     SEC. 401. GRANTS FOR INCREASING DATA CAPACITY FOR PURPOSES OF 
                   ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

       (a) Program Authorized.--From funds appropriated under 
     subsection (e) for a fiscal year, the Secretary may award 
     grants, on a competitive basis, to State educational agencies 
     to enable the State educational agencies to develop or 
     increase the capacity of data systems for assessment and 
     accountability purposes, including the collection of 
     graduation rates.
       (b) Application.--Each State educational agency desiring a 
     grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may require.
       (c) Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency that 
     receives a grant under this section shall use the grant funds 
     for the purpose of--
       (1) increasing the capacity of, or creating, State 
     databases to collect, disaggregate, and report information 
     related to student achievement, enrollment, and graduation 
     rates for assessment and accountability purposes; and
       (2) reporting, on an annual basis, for the elementary 
     schools and secondary schools within the State, on--
       (A) the enrollment data from the beginning of the academic 
     year;
       (B) the enrollment data from the end of the academic year; 
     and
       (C) the twelfth grade graduation rates.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Graduation rate.--The term ``graduation rate'' means 
     the percentage that--
       (A) the total number of students who--
       (i) graduate from a secondary school with a regular diploma 
     (which shall not include the recognized equivalent of a 
     secondary school diploma or an alternative degree) in an 
     academic year; and
       (ii) graduated on time by progressing 1 grade per academic 
     year; represents of
       (B) the total number of students who entered the secondary 
     school in the entry level academic year applicable to the 
     graduating students.
       (2) State educational agency.--The term ``State educational 
     agency'' has the meaning given such term in section 9101 of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     7801).
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Education.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $50,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2006, and such sums as may be necessary for each 
     of the 2 succeeding fiscal years.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to support the introduction 
today, along with my colleagues Senators Clinton and Kennedy, of 
Senator Murray's bill to improve America's high schools.
  We have all heard a lot of talk these days about the need to improve 
America's high schools. Bill Gates makes the point that the academic 
caliber of our high school graduates is one of the greatest factors in 
our country's ability to innovate and to compete internationally in 
technological advancements. The CEO of Intel, Craig Barrett, tells the 
story of the how U.S. students are eclipsed in the international 
science competition his firm sponsors. University presidents I meet 
with talk about the strain that remedial education for incoming 
freshmen places on the school's faculty and budgets.
  The President's budget this year includes his high school initiative, 
which proposes to redirect money to high schools. There's a big catch, 
though. The President says that to fund his high school initiative we 
need to eliminate one of our most effective education programs for high 
schools, technical schools and colleges--Perkins Vocational and 
Technical Education grants.
  There is a better way. The Pathways for All Students to Success 
(PASS) Act provides the resources schools need to sharpen the focus on 
literacy and math--skills critical to success in the workforce or in 
post-secondary studies. High schools can employ literacy and math 
coaches to help support and supplement the teachers in traditional 
classrooms. The legislation also allows for additional academic 
counseling, to provide that targeted, individualized assistance that 
many students need to achieve proficiency in key academic areas.
  The PASS Act also provides funding that allows schools not meeting 
national standards to implement proven, comprehensive school reform to 
help students learn. Finally, current data on high school graduation 
rates is incomplete, inconsistent and often inaccurate. That makes it 
harder for schools to know which populations of students are most in 
need of additional attention. This legislation provides funding for 
school systems to collect, disaggregate and report accurate graduation 
rates.
  Now is the time to strengthen our high schools. Expectations in the 
workplace and on post-secondary campuses

[[Page 7942]]

are higher than ever for high school graduates. The PASS Act supports 
students working toward high school graduation, enhancing their pathway 
to success.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 922. A bill to establish and provide for the treatment of 
Individual Development Accounts, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I along with Senator Lieberman am 
introducing the Savings and Working Families Act of 2005.
  The need for this legislation comes at a time when Americans face an 
ongoing savings and assets crisis. One third of all Americans have no 
assets available for investment, and another fifth have only negligible 
assets. The United States household savings rate lags far behind that 
of other industrial nations, constraining national economic growth and 
keeping many Americans from entering the economic mainstream by buying 
a house, obtaining an adequate education, or starting a business.
  Low-income Americans face a huge hurdle when trying to save. 
Individual Development Accounts, IDAs, provide them with a way to work 
toward building assets while instilling the practice of savings into 
their everyday lives. IDAs are one of the most promising tools that 
enable low-income and low-wealth American families to save, build 
assets, and enter the financial mainstream. Based on the idea that all 
Americans should have access, through the tax code or through direct 
expenditures, to the structures that subsidize homeownership and 
retirement savings of wealthier families, IDAs encourage savings 
efforts among the poor by offering them a one-to-one match for their 
own deposits. IDAs reward the monthly savings of working-poor families 
who are trying to buy their first home, pay for post-secondary 
education, or start a small business. These matched savings accounts 
are similar to 401(k) plans and other matched savings accounts, but can 
serve a broad range of purposes.
  The Savings and Working Families Act of 2005 builds on existing IDA 
programs by creating tax credit incentives for an additional 900,000 
accounts. Individuals between 18 and 60 who are not dependents or 
students and meet the income requirements would be eligible to 
establish and contribute to an IDA. For single filers, the income limit 
would be $20,000 in modified aggregate gross income, AGI. The 
corresponding thresholds for head-of-household and joint filers would 
be $30,000 and $40,000, respectively.
  Participants could generally withdraw their contributions and 
matching funds for qualified purposes, which include certain higher 
education expenses, first-time home purchase expenditures, and small 
business capitalization.
  Additionally, this bill would create a tax credit to defray the cost 
of establishing and running IDA programs, contributing matching funds 
to the appropriate accounts, and providing financial education to 
account holders. Program sponsors could be qualified institutions, 
qualified nonprofits, or qualified Indian tribes, and would have to be 
an institution eligible under current law to serve as the custodian of 
IRAs. Sponsors could claim a tax credit that would have two components. 
The first would be a $50 credit per account to offset the ongoing costs 
of maintaining and administering each account and providing financial 
education to participants. Except for the first year that an account is 
open, the credit would be available only for accounts with a balance, 
at year's end, of more than $100. In addition, there would be a credit 
for the dollar-to-dollar matching amounts.
  IDAs work to spur savings by low-income individuals. The American 
Dream Demonstration, ADD, a 14-site IDA program, has proven that low-
income families, with proper incentives and support, can and do save 
for longer-term goals. In ADD, average monthly net deposits per 
participant were $19.07, with the average participant saving 50 percent 
of the monthly savings target and making deposits in 6 of 12 months. 
Participants accumulated an average of $700 per year including matching 
contributions. Importantly, deposits increased as the monthly target 
increased, indicating that low-income families' saving behavior, like 
that of wealthier individuals; is influenced by the incentives they 
receive.
  Additionally, key to the success of IDAs is the economic education 
that participants receive. Information about repairing credit, reducing 
expenditures, applying for the Earned Income Tax Credit, avoiding 
predatory lenders, and accessing financial services helps IDA 
participants to reach savings goals and to integrate themselves into 
the mainstream economic system. The encouragement and connection to 
supportive services helps low-income individuals to keep early 
withdrawals to a minimum and overcome obstacles to saving. Banks and 
credit unions benefit from these new customer relations, and States 
benefit from decreased presence of check-cashing, pawnshop, and other 
predatory outlets.
  But more than income enhancement, asset accumulation affects 
individuals' confidence about the future, willingness to defer 
gratification, avoidance of risky behavior, and investment in 
community. In families where assets are owned, children do better in 
school, voting participation increases, and family stability improves. 
Reliance on public assistance decreases as families use their assets to 
access higher education and better jobs, reduce their housing costs 
through ownership, and create their own job opportunities through 
entrepreneurship.
  We must re-instill the value that Americans once put into saving and 
promote an ownership society. Saving must once again become a national 
virtue. At stake are not just the financial security and prosperity of 
Americans as individuals but America as a nation. This bill takes a 
step in reaching out to low-income Americans to meet this goal.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Savings and Working Families Act 
of 2005.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, and Mr. Obama):
  S. 923. A bill to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act 
to require a State to promote financial education under the Temporary 
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program and to allow financial 
education to count as a work activity under that program; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the TANF 
Financial Education Promotion Act of 2005 in order to call attention to 
an important issue for low-income families financial literacy. I am 
proud to be reintroducing this bill during the month of April, which is 
Financial Literacy Month.
  One of the goals of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 
(TANF) Program is to help low-income families transition from welfare 
to work. However, there is more to leaving poverty than just finding a 
job. Welfare recipients must learn the skills that will help them build 
savings and establish good credit so that they can stay off welfare. 
Currently, TANF does not offer financial education to low-income 
individuals, leaving welfare recipients at risk of dependence upon 
public assistance.
  Furthermore, millions of low-income families, including families 
receiving TANF, are unbanked. These households tend to do their banking 
at check-cashing outlets that charge exorbitant fees for such services. 
A lack of basic consumer finance education, including lack of 
familiarity with how a checking or savings account works, has been 
cited as a major reason why millions of Americans do not set up such 
accounts.
  Not only are low-income people more likely to be unbanked than other 
individuals, but they are also the most vulnerable to abusive lending 
practices and hostile credit arrangements. Those with the fewest 
financial resources end up paying the most to obtain financing. 
Financial education that addresses predatory lending will help prevent 
low-income families from becoming

[[Page 7943]]

victims of unaffordable loan payments, equity stripping, and 
foreclosure.
  Burdened by significant financial needs, welfare recipients need 
practical information on the fundamentals of saving, household 
budgeting, taxes, and credit. With this knowledge, individuals will be 
better equipped to move toward self-sufficiency and maintain financial 
independence.
  The TANF Financial Education Promotion Act makes strides in financial 
literacy for welfare recipients by requiring states to use TANF funds 
to collaborate with community-based organizations, banks, and community 
colleges to create financial education programs for low-income families 
receiving welfare and for those transitioning from welfare to work.
  I am not alone in advocating financial literacy for TANF recipients. 
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has said, ``Educational and 
training programs may be the most critical service offered by 
community-based organizations to enhance the ability of lower-income 
households to accumulate assets.''
  I urge my colleagues to join me in helping the most vulnerable 
families in the United States get access to the tools they will need to 
successfully make the transition from welfare to work.
  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. 923

       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 ``TANF Financial Education 
     Promotion Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Most recipients of assistance under the Temporary 
     Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program established 
     under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and individuals moving toward self-
     sufficiency operate outside the financial mainstream, paying 
     high costs to handle their finances and saving little for 
     emergencies or the future.
       (2) Currently, personal debt levels and bankruptcy filing 
     rates are high and savings rates are at their lowest levels 
     in 70 years. The inability of many households to budget, 
     save, and invest prevents them from laying the foundation for 
     a secure financial future.
       (3) Financial planning can help families meet near-term 
     obligations and maximize their longer-term well being, 
     especially valuable for populations that have traditionally 
     been underserved by our financial system.
       (4) Financial education can give individuals the necessary 
     financial tools to create household budgets, initiate savings 
     plans, and acquire assets.
       (5) Financial education can prevent vulnerable customers 
     from becoming entangled in financially devastating credit 
     arrangements.
       (6) Financial education that addresses abusive lending 
     practices targeted at specific neighborhoods or vulnerable 
     segments of the population can prevent unaffordable payments, 
     equity stripping, and foreclosure.
       (7) Financial education speaks to the broader purpose of 
     the TANF Program to equip individuals with the tools to 
     succeed and support themselves and their families in self-
     sufficiency.

     SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT TO PROMOTE FINANCIAL EDUCATION UNDER 
                   TANF.

       (a) State Plan.--Section 402(a)(1)(A) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)(1)(A)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(vii) Establish goals and take action to promote 
     financial education, as defined in section 407(j), among 
     parents and caretakers receiving assistance under the program 
     through collaboration with community-based organizations, 
     financial institutions, and the Cooperative State Research, 
     Education, and Extension Service of the Department of 
     Agriculture.''.
       (b) Inclusion of Financial Education as a Work Activity.--
     Section 407 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C 607) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or (12)'' and 
     inserting ``(12), or (13)''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or (12)'' each place 
     it appears and inserting ``(12), or (13)'';
       (2) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (11), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (12), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) financial education, as defined in subsection 
     (j).''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) Definition of Financial Education.--In this part, the 
     term `financial education' means education that promotes an 
     understanding of consumer, economic, and personal finance 
     concepts, including the basic principles involved with 
     earning, budgeting, spending, saving, investing, and 
     taxation.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     take effect on October 1, 2005.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, Mr. Sarbanes, and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 924. A bill to establish a grant program to enhance the financial 
and retirement literacy of mid-life and older Americans to reduce 
financial abuse and fraud among such Americans, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I would like to speak today about an 
issue that I believe should be a lifelong goal for all Americans--
financial literacy.
  More specifically, I want to highlight the necessity of financial 
literacy for men and women who are close to retirement. Senior citizens 
are too often the victims of predatory mortgage and lending abuses and 
other financial scams. AARP surveys show that over half of 
telemarketing fraud victims are age 50 or older. In fact, financial 
exploitation is the largest single category of abuse against older 
persons. It is clear that the vulnerability of this population stems 
from a lack of financial knowledge, so it is more important than ever 
that this Congress take steps to increase the availability of financial 
education for midlife and senior citizens.
  Not only does poor financial literacy leave older Americans 
vulnerable to financial fraud, but it also leads to poor retirement 
planning. In the next thirty years, the number of Americans over the 
age of 65 will double. For many of these Americans, Social Security 
alone will be insufficient to cover all their expenses, particularly as 
health care costs rise. Only about half of American workers are 
currently participating in any pension plan, leaving more than 75 
million Americans without an employer-sponsored pension. Even worse is 
the fact that fifty million Americans have no retirement savings 
whatsoever. These statistics are frightening. As our population lives 
longer, we must focus on retirement education for mid-life and aging 
Americans as well as consumer education for seniors.
  My legislation, the Education for Retirement Security Act will 
address the need for financial literacy among seniors by creating a 
$100 million competitive grant program that would provide resources to 
State and area agencies on aging, and nonprofit community based 
organizations, to provide financial education to mid-life and older 
Americans. The goal of this education is to enhance these individuals' 
financial and retirement knowledge and reduce their vulnerability to 
financial abuse and fraud, including telemarketing, mortgage, and 
pension fraud. The bill also creates a national technical assistance 
program that will designate at least one national grantee to provide 
financial education materials and training to local grantees.
  I am proud to be reintroducing this legislation during the month of 
April, which is Financial Literacy Month.
  We must offer those individuals who are close to or in retirement the 
tools they will need to make sound financial decisions and prepare 
appropriately for their retirement. The Education for Retirement 
Security Act will help older Americans learn how to avoid scams and 
invest well. With savvy financial planning and smart consumer skills, 
senior citizens will be more empowered to protect themselves and 
ultimately be better able to enjoy a more secure retirement.
  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. 924

       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 ``Education for Retirement 
     Security Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:

[[Page 7944]]

       (1) Improving financial literacy is a critical and complex 
     task for Americans of all ages.
       (2) Low levels of savings and high levels of personal and 
     real estate debt are serious problems for many households 
     nearing retirement.
       (3) Only 53 percent of working Americans have any form of 
     pension coverage. Three out of four women aged 65 or over 
     receive no income from employer-provided pensions.
       (4) The more limited timeframe that mid-life and older 
     individuals and families have to assess the realities of 
     their individual circumstances, to recover from counter-
     productive choices and decisionmaking processes, and to 
     benefit from more informed financial practices, has immediate 
     impact and near term consequences for Americans nearing or of 
     retirement age.
       (5) Research indicates that there are now 4 basic sources 
     of retirement income security. Those sources are social 
     security benefits, pensions and savings, healthcare insurance 
     coverage, and, for an increasing number of older individuals, 
     necessary earnings from working during one's ``retirement'' 
     years.
       (6) Over the next 30 years, the number of older individuals 
     in the United States is expected to double, from 35,000,000 
     to nearly 75,000,000, and long-term care costs are expected 
     to skyrocket.
       (7) Financial exploitation is the largest single category 
     of abuse against older individuals and this population 
     comprises more than \1/2\ of all telemarketing victims in the 
     United States.
       (8) The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Identity Theft Data 
     Clearinghouse has reported that incidents of identity theft 
     targeting individuals over the age of 60 increased from 1,821 
     victims in 2000 to 21,084 victims in 2004, an increase of 
     more than 11 times in number.

     SEC. 3. GRANT PROGRAM TO ENHANCE FINANCIAL AND RETIREMENT 
                   LITERACY AND REDUCE FINANCIAL ABUSE AND FRAUD 
                   AMONG MID-LIFE AND OLDER AMERICANS.

       (a) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to award grants 
     to eligible entities to provide financial education programs 
     to mid-life and older individuals who reside in local 
     communities in order to--
       (1) enhance financial and retirement knowledge among such 
     individuals; and
       (2) reduce financial abuse and fraud, including 
     telemarketing, mortgage, and pension fraud, among such 
     individuals.
       (b) Eligible Entities.--An entity is eligible to receive a 
     grant under this section if such entity is--
       (1) a State agency or area agency on aging; or
       (2) a nonprofit organization with a proven record of 
     providing--
       (A) services to mid-life and older individuals;
       (B) consumer awareness programs; or
       (C) supportive services to low-income families.
       (c) Application.--An eligible entity desiring a grant under 
     this section shall submit an application to the Secretary in 
     such form and containing such information as the Secretary 
     may require, including a plan for continuing the programs 
     provided with grant funds under this section after the grant 
     expires.
       (d) Limitation on Administrative Costs.--A recipient of a 
     grant under this section may not use more than 4 percent of 
     the total amount of the grant in each fiscal year for the 
     administrative costs of carrying out the programs provided 
     with grant funds under this section.
       (e) Evaluation and Report.--
       (1) Establishment of performance measures.--The Secretary 
     shall develop measures to evaluate the programs provided with 
     grant funds under this section.
       (2) Evaluation according to performance measures.--Applying 
     the performance measures developed under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall evaluate the programs provided with grant 
     funds under this section in order to--
       (A) judge the performance and effectiveness of such 
     programs;
       (B) identify which programs represent the best practices of 
     entities developing such programs for mid-life and older 
     individuals; and
       (C) identify which programs may be replicated.
       (3) Annual reports.--For each fiscal year in which a grant 
     is awarded under this section, the Secretary shall submit a 
     report to Congress containing a description of the status of 
     the grant program under this section, a description of the 
     programs provided with grant funds under this section, and 
     the results of the evaluation of such programs under 
     paragraph (2).

     SEC. 4. NATIONAL TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

       (a) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to award a 
     grant to 1 or more eligible entities to--
       (1) create and make available instructional materials and 
     information that promote financial education; and
       (2) provide training and other related assistance regarding 
     the establishment of financial education programs to eligible 
     entities awarded a grant under section 3.
       (b) Eligible Entities.--An entity is eligible to receive a 
     grant under this section if such entity is a national 
     nonprofit organization with substantial experience in the 
     field of financial education.
       (c) Application.--An eligible entity desiring a grant under 
     this section shall submit an application to the Secretary in 
     such form and containing such information as the Secretary 
     may require.
       (d) Basis and Term.--The Secretary shall award a grant 
     under this section on a competitive, merit basis for a term 
     of 5 years.

     SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Financial education.--The term ``financial education'' 
     means education that promotes an understanding of consumer, 
     economic, and personal finance concepts, including saving for 
     retirement, long-term care, and estate planning and education 
     on predatory lending and financial abuse schemes.
       (2) Mid-life individual.--The term ``mid-life individual'' 
     means an individual aged 45 to 64 years.
       (3) Older individual.--The term ``older individual'' means 
     an individual aged 65 or older.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this Act, $100,000,000 for each of the fiscal 
     years 2006 through 2010.
       (b) Limitation on Funds for Evaluation and Report.--The 
     Secretary may not use more than $200,000 of the amounts 
     appropriated under subsection (a) for each fiscal year to 
     carry out section 3(e).
       (c) Limitation on Funds for Training and Technical 
     Assistance.--The Secretary may not use less than 5 percent or 
     more than 10 percent of amounts appropriated under subsection 
     (a) for each fiscal year to carry out section 4.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, and Mr. Baucus):
  S. 925. A bill to promote youth financial education; to the Committee 
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Youth 
Financial Education Act. I am pleased to introduce this bill during the 
month of April--Financial Literacy Month.
  It is hard to underestimate the importance of financial literacy for 
our youth. As credit, banking, and financial systems in this country 
become more and more complex, it is time to make sure that our 
education system teaches our children the fundamental principles of 
earning, spending, saving and investing, so that they can be successful 
citizens. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said himself that 
``Improving basic financial education at the elementary and secondary 
school levels is essential to providing a foundation for financial 
literacy that can help prevent younger people from making poor 
financial decisions.'' It is crucial not only for the well-being of our 
children, but for the future of our society as a whole that all 
citizens understand how to manage a checking account, use a credit 
card, and estimate their taxes.
  According to the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial 
Literacy's Survey of High School Seniors, which measures students' 
aptitude and ability to manage financial resources such as credit 
cards, insurance, retirement funds and savings accounts, only 52.3 
percent of students answered the survey questions correctly. In less 
than a year, 54 percent of these students who go onto college will 
carry a credit card. These statistics make it evident that we must do 
more to arm our youth with the tools they need to make informed 
decisions about the fiscal realities they will face upon entering 
college or the workforce.
  In 2004, only 7 states required students to complete a course that 
includes personal finance before graduating from high school. In my 
home State of New Jersey, New Egypt High School is the only school that 
requires a course financial education. Several years ago I had the 
pleasure of teaching a class of these students, and came away impressed 
with their knowledge and competency in financial matters.
  While awareness of the importance of financial literacy is improving, 
it is still not being addressed appropriately in schools. Our schools 
must prepare our children to succeed in every way, including in their 
financial decisions.

[[Page 7945]]

  I am pleased that I successfully added a provision to the No Child 
Left Behind Act giving elementary and secondary schools access to funds 
that will allow them to include financial education as part of their 
basic educational curriculum. Although this was an important step in 
the right direction, Congress can and should do more to address this 
Issue.
  The legislation I am introducing today will provide grants to States 
to help them develop and implement financial education programs in 
elementary and secondary schools. These programs will offer 
professional development for teachers and prepare them to provide 
financial education. It would also establish a national clearinghouse 
for instructional materials and information regarding model financial 
education programs.
  Earlier this year, the Senate debated the Bankruptcy Reform Bill that 
seeks to change the rules governing bankruptcy. While I agree that 
bankruptcy reform should provide an incentive for capable individuals 
to honor their financial obligations, this legislation will make it 
that much more difficult for people who have fallen into debt to 
declare bankruptcy. With these reforms imminent, it will be all the 
more critical to take a proactive approach to the problem of personal 
debt in this country and make sure that the next generation learns how 
to better manage their money.
  I ask for my colleagues to join me in support of the Youth Financial 
Education Act, which will equip our nation's youth with skills to 
become responsible consumers and enjoy economic security as well as 
economic opportunity in their futures.
  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. 925

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

     SECTION 1. PROMOTING YOUTH FINANCIAL LITERACY.

       Title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

              ``PART D--PROMOTING YOUTH FINANCIAL LITERACY

     ``SEC. 4401. SHORT TITLE AND FINDINGS.

       ``(a) Short Title.--This part may be cited as the `Youth 
     Financial Education Act'.
       ``(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       ``(1) In order to succeed in our dynamic American economy, 
     young people must obtain the skills, knowledge, and 
     experience necessary to manage their personal finances and 
     obtain general financial literacy. All young adults should 
     have the educational tools necessary to make informed 
     financial decisions.
       ``(2) Despite the critical importance of financial literacy 
     to young people, the average student who graduates from high 
     school lacks basic skills in the management of personal 
     financial affairs. A nationwide survey conducted in 2004 by 
     the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy 
     examined the financial knowledge of 4,074 12th graders. On 
     average, survey respondents answered only 52 percent of the 
     questions correctly. This figure is up only slightly from the 
     50 percent average score in 2002.
       ``(3) An evaluation by the National Endowment for Financial 
     Education High School Financial Planning Program undertaken 
     jointly with the United States Department of Agriculture 
     Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service 
     demonstrates that as little as 10 hours of classroom 
     instruction can impart substantial knowledge and affect 
     significant change in how teens handle their money.
       ``(4) State educational leaders have recognized the 
     importance of providing a basic financial education to 
     students in kindergarten through grade 12 by integrating 
     financial education into State educational standards, but by 
     2004, only 7 States required students to complete a course 
     that covered personal finance before graduating from high 
     school.
       ``(5) Teacher training and professional development are 
     critical to achieving youth financial literacy. Teachers 
     should be given the tools they need to educate our Nation's 
     youth on personal finance and economics.
       ``(6) Personal financial education helps prepare students 
     for the workforce and for financial independence by 
     developing their sense of individual responsibility, 
     improving their life skills, and providing them with a 
     thorough understanding of consumer economics that will 
     benefit them for their entire lives.
       ``(7) Financial education integrates instruction in 
     valuable life skills with instruction in economics, including 
     income and taxes, money management, investment and spending, 
     and the importance of personal savings.
       ``(8) The consumers and investors of tomorrow are in our 
     schools today. The teaching of personal finance should be 
     encouraged at all levels of our Nation's educational system, 
     from kindergarten through grade 12.

     ``SEC. 4402. STATE GRANT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary is authorized to 
     provide grants to State educational agencies to develop and 
     integrate youth financial education programs for students in 
     elementary schools and secondary schools.
       ``(b) State Plan.--
       ``(1) Approved state plan required.--To be eligible to 
     receive a grant under this section, a State educational 
     agency shall submit an application that includes a State 
     plan, described in paragraph (2), that is approved by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(2) State plan contents.--The State plan referred to in 
     paragraph (1) shall include--
       ``(A) a description of how the State educational agency 
     will use grant funds;
       ``(B) a description of how the programs supported by a 
     grant will be coordinated with other relevant Federal, State, 
     regional, and local programs; and
       ``(C) a description of how the State educational agency 
     will evaluate program performance.
       ``(c) Allocation of Funds.--
       ``(1) Allocation factors.--Except as otherwise provided in 
     paragraph (2), the Secretary shall allocate the amounts made 
     available to carry out this section pursuant to subsection 
     (a) to each State according to the relative populations in 
     all the States of students in kindergarten through grade 12, 
     as determined by the Secretary based on the most recent 
     satisfactory data.
       ``(2) Minimum allocation.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriations and notwithstanding paragraph (1), a State 
     that has submitted a plan under subsection (b) that is 
     approved by the Secretary shall be allocated an amount that 
     is not less than $500,000 for a fiscal year.
       ``(3) Reallocation.--In any fiscal year an allocation under 
     this subsection--
       ``(A) for a State that has not submitted a plan under 
     subsection (b); or
       ``(B) for a State whose plan submitted under subsection (b) 
     has been disapproved by the Secretary;
     shall be reallocated to States with approved plans under this 
     section in accordance with paragraph (1).
       ``(d) Use of Grant Funds.--
       ``(1) Required uses.--A grant made to a State educational 
     agency under this part shall be used--
       ``(A) to provide funds to local educational agencies and 
     public schools to carry out financial education programs for 
     students in kindergarten through grade 12 based on the 
     concept of achieving financial literacy through the teaching 
     of personal financial management skills and the basic 
     principles involved with earning, spending, saving, and 
     investing;
       ``(B) to carry out professional development programs to 
     prepare teachers and administrators for financial education; 
     and
       ``(C) to monitor and evaluate programs supported under 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       ``(2) Limitation on administrative costs.--A State 
     educational agency receiving a grant under subsection (a) may 
     use not more than 4 percent of the total amount of the grant 
     in each fiscal year for the administrative costs of carrying 
     out this section.
       ``(e) Report to the Secretary.--Each State educational 
     agency receiving a grant under this section shall transmit a 
     report to the Secretary with respect to each fiscal year for 
     which a grant is received. The report shall describe the 
     programs supported by the grant and the results of the State 
     educational agency's monitoring and evaluation of such 
     programs.

     ``SEC. 4403. CLEARINGHOUSE.

       ``(a) Authority.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriations, the Secretary shall make a grant to, or 
     execute a contract with, an eligible entity with substantial 
     experience in the field of financial education, such as the 
     Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, to 
     establish, operate, and maintain a national clearinghouse (in 
     this part referred to as the `Clearinghouse') for 
     instructional materials and information regarding model 
     financial education programs and best practices.
       ``(b) Eligible Entity.--In this section, the term `eligible 
     entity' means a national nonprofit organization with a proven 
     record of--
       ``(1) cataloging youth financial literacy materials; and
       ``(2) providing support services and materials to schools 
     and other organizations that work to promote youth financial 
     literacy.
       ``(c) Application.--An eligible entity desiring to 
     establish, operate, and maintain the Clearinghouse shall 
     submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such 
     manner, and accompanied by such information, as the Secretary 
     may reasonably require.
       ``(d) Basis and Term.--The Secretary shall make the grant 
     or contract authorized under subsection (a) on a competitive, 
     merit basis for a term of 5 years.

[[Page 7946]]

       ``(e) Use of Funds.--The Clearinghouse shall use the funds 
     provided under a grant or contract made under subsection 
     (a)--
       ``(1) to maintain a repository of instructional materials 
     and related information regarding financial education 
     programs for elementary schools and secondary schools, 
     including kindergartens, for use by States, localities, and 
     the general public;
       ``(2) to disseminate to States, localities, and the general 
     public, through electronic and other means, instructional 
     materials and related information regarding financial 
     education programs for elementary schools and secondary 
     schools, including kindergartens; and
       ``(3) to the extent that resources allow, to provide 
     technical assistance to States, localities, and the general 
     public on the design, establishment, and implementation of 
     financial education programs for elementary schools and 
     secondary schools, including kindergartens.
       ``(f) Consultation.--The chief executive officer of the 
     eligible entity selected to establish and operate the 
     Clearinghouse shall consult with the Department of the 
     Treasury and the Securities Exchange Commission with respect 
     to its activities under subsection (e).
       ``(g) Submission to Clearinghouse.--Each Federal agency or 
     department that develops financial education programs and 
     instructional materials for such programs shall submit to the 
     Clearinghouse information on the programs and copies of the 
     materials.
       ``(h) Application of Copyright Laws.--In carrying out this 
     section the Clearinghouse shall comply with the provisions of 
     title 17 of the United States Code.

     ``SEC. 4404. EVALUATION AND REPORT.

       ``(a) Performance Measures.--The Secretary shall develop 
     measures to evaluate the performance of programs assisted 
     under sections 4402 and 4403.
       ``(b) Evaluation According to Performance Measures.--
     Applying the performance measures developed under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary shall evaluate programs assisted under 
     sections 4402 and 4403--
       ``(1) to judge their performance and effectiveness;
       ``(2) to identify which of the programs represent the best 
     practices of entities developing financial education programs 
     for students in kindergarten through grade 12; and
       ``(3) to identify which of the programs may be replicated 
     and used to provide technical assistance to States, 
     localities, and the general public.
       ``(c) Report.--For each fiscal year for which there are 
     appropriations under section 4407(a), the Secretary shall 
     transmit a report to Congress describing the status of the 
     implementation of this part. The report shall include the 
     results of the evaluation required under subsection (b) and a 
     description of the programs supported under section 4402.

     ``SEC. 4405. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this part:
       ``(1) Financial education.--The term `financial education' 
     means educational activities and experiences, planned and 
     supervised by qualified teachers, that enable students to 
     understand basic economic and consumer principles, acquire 
     the skills and knowledge necessary to manage personal and 
     household finances, and develop a range of competencies that 
     will enable the students to become responsible consumers in 
     today's complex economy.
       ``(2) Qualified teacher.--The term `qualified teacher' 
     means a teacher who holds a valid teaching certification or 
     is considered to be qualified by the State educational agency 
     in the State in which the teacher works.

     ``SEC. 4406. PROHIBITION.

       ``Nothing in this part shall be construed to authorize an 
     officer or employee of the Federal Government to mandate, 
     direct, or control a State, local educational agency, or 
     school's specific instructional content, curriculum, or 
     program of instruction, as a condition of eligibility to 
     receive funds under this part.

     ``SEC. 4407. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``(a) Authorization.--For the purposes of carrying out this 
     part, there are authorized to be appropriated $100,000,000 
     for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010.
       ``(b) Limitation on Funds for Clearinghouse.--The Secretary 
     may use not less than 2 percent and not more than 5 percent 
     of amounts appropriated under subsection (a) for each fiscal 
     year to carry out section 4403.
       ``(c) Limitation on Funds for Secretary Evaluation.--The 
     Secretary may use not more than $200,000 from the amounts 
     appropriated under subsection (a) for each fiscal year to 
     carry out subsections (a) and (b) of section 4404.
       ``(d) Limitation on Administrative Costs.--Except as 
     necessary to carry out subsections (a) and (b) of section 
     4404 using amounts described in subsection (c) of this 
     section, the Secretary shall not use any portion of the 
     amounts appropriated under subsection (a) for the costs of 
     administering this part.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Enzi):
  S. 926. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
that the credit for producing fuel from a nonconventional source shall 
apply to gas produced onshore from a formation more than 15,000 feet 
deep; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I proudly rise to introduce The 
Natural Gas Production Act of 2005.
  One of the challenges facing our economy is increasing energy prices. 
Take, for example, natural gas that accounts for 22 percent of American 
energy consumption. According to the Energy Information Administration, 
over the next 20 years, U.S. natural gas consumption will increase by 
over 50 percent. At the same time, U.S. natural gas production will 
only grow by 14 percent. At a time when natural gas prices are already 
at an all time high, it is critical that we increase our supply by 
developing our domestic natural gas.
  This legislation will provide an incentive to increase the supply of 
domestically produced natural gas, which in turn will help alleviate 
high natural gas prices.
  The Natural Gas Production Act of 2005 will add natural gas produced 
from formations more than 15,000 feet deep (Deep Gas), to the list of 
qualifying fuels for the Section 29 non-conventional tax credit. 
Experts consider deep gas drilling at more than 15,000 feet to be a 
non-conventional source of energy production.
  Studies show the resource potential below 15,000 feet for natural gas 
is great. The Department of Energy's Strategic Center for Natural Gas 
has estimated there to be 130 trillion cubic feet below 15,000 feet in 
the lower 48. In comparison, that is equal to the proven and potential 
reserves on the Alaskan North Slope.
  While these vast reserves remain, very little production is occurring 
from depths greater than 15,000. Deep gas wells require a considerable 
amount of time and money. On average these wells cost more than $6.1 
million, and for wells deeper than 20,000 feet costs can exceed $16 
million. Add to that the minimum one-year and longer drilling time and 
you can clearly see that Federal drilling incentives are needed to help 
promote and speed production of this enormous potential resource.
  To drill a deep well, a drilling rig will employ about 25 people 
directly. In 1979, 128 deep well completions in Oklahoma created 2,630 
jobs. In addition to direct jobs, economists estimate that 60 to 75 
indirect jobs will be created as well.
  Due to changes in the regulatory governance of the industry and 
cyclical market conditions over the next two and one-half decades, deep 
drilling activity all across the country has declined substantially.
  I am introducing this legislation, along with Senator Vitter, today 
to encourage more domestic production in an area of proven reserves 
that will increase our supply. I thank Senator Vitter for his work and 
I urge members to support us in this effort. I ask unanimous consent 
that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
  If you have any questions, please contact Mike Ference on my Staff at 
224-1036.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 926

       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 ``Natural Gas Production Act 
     of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR PRODUCING FUEL FROM NONCONVENTIONAL SOURCE 
                   TO APPLY TO GAS PRODUCED ONSHORE FROM 
                   FORMATIONS MORE THAN 15,000 FEET DEEP.

       (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 29(c)(1) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified fuels) 
     is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (i), by 
     striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii) and inserting 
     ``or'', and by inserting after clause (ii) the following new 
     clause:
       ``(iii) an onshore well from a formation more than 15,000 
     feet deep, and''.
       (b) Eligible Wells.--Section 29 of such Code is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Eligible Deep Gas Wells.--In the case of a well 
     producing qualified fuel described in subsection (B)(iii)--
       ``(1) for purposes of subsection (f)(1)(A), such well shall 
     be treated as drilled before

[[Page 7947]]

     January 1, 1993, if such well is drilled after the date of 
     the enactment of this subsection, and
       ``(2) subsection (f)(2) shall not apply.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years ending after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. 
        Johnson, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 927. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
expand and improve coverage of mental health services under the 
medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a very 
important piece of legislation, the Medicare Mental Health 
Modernization Act of 2005.
  Our Nation's Medicare beneficiaries--our elderly and disabled 
population--have limited access to mental health services. Medicare 
restricts the types of mental health services available to 
beneficiaries and the types of providers who are allowed to offer such 
care. It also charges higher copayments for mental health services than 
it does for all other health care. In order to receive mental health 
care, seniors and the disabled must pay 50 percent of the cost of a 
visit to their mental health specialist, as opposed to the 20 percent 
that they pay for other services. Medicare also limits the number of 
days a beneficiary can receive mental health care in a hospital setting 
to 190 days over an individual's lifetime.
  We must address this problem. The need is glaring. Almost 20 percent 
of Americans over age 65 have a serious mental disorder. They suffer 
from depression, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, anxiety, late-life 
schizophrenia and, all too often, substance abuse. These are serious 
illnesses that must be treated. Unfortunately, they are often 
unidentified by primary care physicians, or the appropriate services 
are simply out of reach. Americans age 65 and older have the highest 
rate of suicide of any other population in the United States. An 
alarming 70 percent of elderly suicide victims have visited their 
primary care doctor in the month prior to committing suicide.
  Medicare is also the primary source of health insurance for millions 
of nonelderly disabled. More than 20 percent of these individuals 
suffer from mental illness and/or addiction. This very needy population 
faces the same discrimination in their mental health coverage.
  As our population ages, the burden of mental illness on seniors, 
their families, and the health care system will only continue increase. 
Experts estimate that by the year 2030, 15 million people over 65 will 
have psychiatric disorders, with the number of individuals suffering 
from Alzheimer's disease doubling. If we do not reform the Medicare 
program to provide greater access to detection and treatment of mental 
illness, the cost of not treating these diseases will rapidly escalate. 
Without the appropriate outpatient mental health services, too many of 
our seniors are forced into nursing homes and hospitals. If We truly 
want to modernize Medicare and make it more efficient, we must provide 
access to these services. Not only will they likely reduce costs in the 
long term, but they will also increase Medicare beneficiaries' quality 
of life.
  The Medicare Mental Health Modernization Act takes critical steps to 
address these issues. First, the bill reduces the 50 percent copayment 
for mental health services to 20 percent. The proposed 20 percent 
copayment is the same as the copayment for all other outpatient 
services in Medicare. Second, the bill would provide access to 
intensive residential services for those who are suffering from severe 
mental illness. This will give people with Alzheimer's disease and 
other serious mental illness the opportunity to be cared for in their 
homes or in community-based settings. Third, the bill expands the 
number of qualified mental health professionals eligible to provide 
services through the Medicare program. This includes licensed 
professional mental health counselors, clinical social workers, and 
marriage and family therapists. This expansion of qualified providers 
is critical to ensuring that seniors throughout the nation, 
particularly those in rural areas, are able to receive the services 
they need.
  In closing, I urge all of my colleagues to step forward to support 
the Medicare Mental Health Modernization Act of 2005. It is time for 
the Medicare program to stop discriminating against seniors and the 
disabled who are suffering from mental illness.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN:
  S. 928. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
for the immediate and permanent repeal of the estate tax on family-
owned businesses and farms, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, four years ago, as projected budget 
surpluses reached over $5 trillion, Congress passed a tax cut bill that 
began the process of addressing the unfairness of the estate tax. Now 
in 2005, the surpluses have long since disappeared, and Congress has 
made no further progress on estate tax relief for America's family-
owned farms and businesses--many of whom still pay this tax today.
  Earlier this month, the House once again voted for a complete repeal 
of the estate tax. I myself have consistently supported complete 
repeal, I have voted in favor of full repeal on multiple occasions, and 
I will continue to support full repeal should that option be brought to 
the floor of the U.S. Senate for a vote in the future. Nevertheless, 
given the persistent state of our more than $400 billion annual 
deficits, it is increasingly doubtful such a bill could obtain the 
necessary votes in the Senate for passage right now.
  I'm not alone in feeling that the votes just aren't there for full 
repeal. President of the U.S. Chamber, Tom Donahue, was quoted this 
week stating that the Chamber would likely support a good compromise 
coming out of the Senate. We all understand the state of affairs and I 
want to echo Mr. Donahue's sentiments. We must work together to bring 
relief to those that this tax affects most--family-owned farms and 
businesses.
  It is the family-owned farms and businesses across Arkansas and all 
across this Nation that serve as the backbone of our rural communities. 
To put it simply, they are the economic engines of rural America. It is 
the family-owned businesses that provide jobs, wages, and health care 
for my constituents. It is the family-owned businesses that sponsor 
Little League, they pay local taxes, they are a part of the community. 
They live there. And that's why family-owned businesses aren't the ones 
that are shutting down and heading off-shore. When we force family 
businesses to spend valuable assets on estate planning and life 
insurance rather than on investing and expanding their businesses, we 
are putting them at a disadvantage to their publically-traded 
competitors. I, for one, intend to fight for these family businesses, 
fight for these communities, and fight for the jobs in rural America.
  In the wake of the House vote and the real lack of votes here in the 
Senate to pass a complete repeal bill, talk of compromise has raised 
speculation of higher exemptions and/or lower tax rates as an 
alternative to complete repeal.
  Quite frankly, I believe these compromise approaches are incomplete 
solutions to the problems faced by family-owned farms and businesses. 
Certainly, I understand that a higher exemption and lower rates will be 
considered as part of a compromise. But both are expensive and 
inefficient methods to specifically reach family-owned farms and 
businesses.
  Given the restraints of our budget deficits today, I ask, how can we 
raise the exemption high enough, or lower the rates low enough, to 
provide necessary relief for family farms and businesses?
  We could not get there in 2001 when projected surpluses reached $5 
trillion. What makes us think we can solve this problem today with 
projected deficits totaling $2.6 trillion in the President's budget?
  We took these approaches in 2001, and family-owned farms and 
businesses still face this tax today, so we should

[[Page 7948]]

be leery of any compromise approach that considers only rates and 
exemptions. They were incomplete compromise solutions then--and they 
will be tomorrow.
  In this environment, I feel we are seriously losing ground on coming 
to a fair and final resolution of this issue. In the meantime, the 
current state of the law places many family-owned businesses in an 
extremely uncertain and precarious position--a law that taxes family-
owned businesses today, then repeals the tax in 2010, and then snaps 
back to pre-2001 law in 2011 is simply not responsible on our part. 
This amounts to nothing more than a nightmarish rollercoaster ride for 
the businesses we intended to help!
  So, we need to set some priorities and go about the business of 
lifting this tax from these family-owned farms and businesses first.
  On the subject of setting priorities, I would like to relay a 
statistic that may startle my colleagues a bit. The IRS Statistics of 
Income for 2003 show that only 7.4 percent of the estate tax is paid on 
``farm assets, closely held stock, or other non-corporate business 
assets.'' These 7.4 percent should be our first priority in any 
compromise the estate tax. The remaining 92.6 percent of assets--such 
as widely-held stock, bonds, insurance proceeds, art, and real estate 
partnerships--should not drive or dictate our actions at the expense of 
America's family-owned farms and businesses.
  This simple statistic helps lead us to a targeted solution which 
should cost less and immediately help those we intended to help in the 
first place. Today, I introduce the ``Estate Tax Repeal Acceleration 
for Family-Owned Businesses and Farms Act''--or ExTRA. Under ExTRA, an 
estate may voluntarily elect to exclude an unlimited portion of family 
business assets from the estate tax. The carryover basis rules will 
apply to these business assets and no estate tax will be paid on them. 
That is the same deal that repeal promises--but we do so immediately 
and permanently--and at a fraction of the cost.
  My bill does not seek to change current law to repeal the estate tax. 
It would leave in place the scheduled increases in the unified credit, 
the decreases in rates, and the repeal of the estate tax in 2010. My 
bill would only seek to rectify the special circumstances of family-
owned businesses and farms, in an attempt, not to inflame the issue 
further, but to resolve this issue now and forever for those this 
effort was originally intended to help.
  The goal of the Lincoln bill is that no family-owned farm or business 
will ever pay the estate tax. Americans are driven to build their lives 
and their communities and they want to be able to pass that on to the 
next generation. What comes of the American dream if someone works hard 
all their life to build something to pass on to their family, their 
legacy, and it has to be sold for taxes.
  If there is an idea that will protect the American dream and the 
family-owned business, we should not be reluctant to put it on the 
table. Today, I am introducing such an idea, and I firmly believe such 
an approach must be part of any compromise if one is reached. In fact, 
I will not support any compromise that does not take care of family 
businesses in Arkansas.
  I urge my colleagues to take a look and study the Lincoln bill to 
immediately and permanently repeal the estate tax for family owned 
farms and businesses.
  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. 928

       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 ``Estate Tax Repeal 
     Acceleration (ExTRA) for Family-Owned Businesses and Farms 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF ESTATE TAX ON FAMILY-OWNED BUSINESSES AND 
                   FARMS.

       (a) Carryover Business Interest Exclusion.--Part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 11 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (relating to taxable estate) is amended by inserting 
     after section 2058 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 2059. CARRYOVER BUSINESS INTERESTS.

       ``(a) General Rules.--
       ``(1) Allowance of deduction.--For purposes of the tax 
     imposed by section 2001, in the case of an estate of a 
     decedent to which this section applies, the value of the 
     taxable estate shall be determined by deducting from the 
     value of the gross estate the adjusted value of the carryover 
     business interests of the decedent which are described in 
     subsection (b)(2).
       ``(2) Application of carryover basis rules.--With respect 
     to the adjusted value of the carryover business interests of 
     the decedent which are described in subsection (b)(2), the 
     rules of section 1023 shall apply.
       ``(b) Estates to Which Section Applies.--
       ``(1) In general.--This section shall apply to an estate 
     if--
       ``(A) the decedent was (at the date of the decedent's 
     death) a citizen or resident of the United States,
       ``(B) the executor elects the application of this section 
     under rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (1) and (3) of 
     section 2032A(d) and files the agreement referred to in 
     subsection (e), and
       ``(C) during the 8-year period ending on the date of the 
     decedent's death there have been periods aggregating 5 years 
     or more during which--
       ``(i) the carryover business interests described in 
     paragraph (2) were owned by the decedent or a member of the 
     decedent's family, and
       ``(ii) there was material participation (within the meaning 
     of section 2032A(e)(6)) by the decedent, a member of the 
     decedent's family, or a qualified heir in the operation of 
     the business to which such interests relate.
       ``(2) Includible carryover business interests.--The 
     carryover business interests described in this paragraph are 
     the interests which--
       ``(A) are included in determining the value of the gross 
     estate,
       ``(B) are acquired by any qualified heir from, or passed to 
     any qualified heir from, the decedent (within the meaning of 
     section 2032A(e)(9)), and
       ``(C) are subject to the election under paragraph (1)(B).
       ``(3) Rules regarding material participation.--For purposes 
     of paragraph (1)(C)(ii)--
       ``(A) in the case a surviving spouse, material 
     participation by such spouse may be satisfied under rules 
     similar to the rules under section 2032A(b)(5),
       ``(B) in the case of a carryover business interest in an 
     entity carrying on multiple trades or businesses, material 
     participation in each trade or business is satisfied by 
     material participation in the entity or in 1 or more of the 
     multiple trades or businesses, and
       ``(C) in the case of a lending and finance business (as 
     defined in section 6166(b)(10)(B)(ii)), material 
     participation is satisfied under the rules under subclause 
     (I) or (II) of section 6166(b)(10)(B)(i).
       ``(c) Adjusted Value of the Carryover Business Interests.--
     For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The adjusted value of any carryover 
     business interest is the value of such interest for purposes 
     of this chapter (determined without regard to this section), 
     as adjusted under paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Adjustment for previous transfers.--The Secretary may 
     increase the value of any carryover business interest by that 
     portion of those assets transferred from such carryover 
     business interest to the decedent's taxable estate within 3 
     years before the date of the decedent's death.
       ``(d) Carryover Business Interest.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     `carryover business interest' means--
       ``(A) an interest as a proprietor in a trade or business 
     carried on as a proprietorship, or
       ``(B) an interest in an entity carrying on a trade or 
     business, if--
       ``(i) at least--

       ``(I) 50 percent of such entity is owned (directly or 
     indirectly) by the decedent and members of the decedent's 
     family,
       ``(II) 70 percent of such entity is so owned by members of 
     2 families, or
       ``(III) 90 percent of such entity is so owned by members of 
     3 families, and

       ``(ii) for purposes of subclause (II) or (III) of clause 
     (i), at least 30 percent of such entity is so owned by the 
     decedent and members of the decedent's family.

     For purposes of the preceding sentence, a decedent shall be 
     treated as engaged in a trade or business if any member of 
     the decedent's family is engaged in such trade or business.
       ``(2) Lending and finance business.--For purposes of this 
     section, any asset used in a lending and finance business (as 
     defined in section 6166(b)(10)(B)(ii)) shall be treated as an 
     asset which is used in carrying on a trade or business.
       ``(3) Limitation.--Such term shall not include--
       ``(A) any interest in a trade or business the principal 
     place of business of which is not located in the United 
     States,
       ``(B) any interest in an entity, if the stock or debt of 
     such entity or a controlled group

[[Page 7949]]

     (as defined in section 267(f)(1)) of which such entity was a 
     member was readily tradable on an established securities 
     market or secondary market (as defined by the Secretary) at 
     any time,
       ``(C) that portion of an interest in an entity transferred 
     by gift to such interest within 3 years before the date of 
     the decedent's death, and
       ``(D) that portion of an interest in an entity which is 
     attributable to cash or marketable securities, or both, in 
     any amount in excess of the reasonably anticipated business 
     needs of such entity.

     In any proceeding before the United States Tax Court 
     involving a notice of deficiency based in whole or in part on 
     the allegation that cash or marketable securities, or both, 
     are accumulated in an amount in excess of the reasonably 
     anticipated business needs of such entity, the burden of 
     proof with respect to such allegation shall be on the 
     Secretary to the extent such cash or marketable securities 
     are less than 35 percent of the value of the interest in such 
     entity.
       ``(4) Rules regarding ownership.--
       ``(A) Ownership of entities.--For purposes of paragraph 
     (1)(B)--
       ``(i) Corporations.--Ownership of a corporation shall be 
     determined by the holding of stock possessing the appropriate 
     percentage of the total combined voting power of all classes 
     of stock entitled to vote and the appropriate percentage of 
     the total value of shares of all classes of stock.
       ``(ii) Partnerships.--Ownership of a partnership shall be 
     determined by the owning of the appropriate percentage of the 
     capital interest in such partnership.
       ``(B) Ownership of tiered entities.--For purposes of this 
     section, if by reason of holding an interest in a trade or 
     business, a decedent, any member of the decedent's family, 
     any qualified heir, or any member of any qualified heir's 
     family is treated as holding an interest in any other trade 
     or business--
       ``(i) such ownership interest in the other trade or 
     business shall be disregarded in determining if the ownership 
     interest in the first trade or business is a carryover 
     business interest, and
       ``(ii) this section shall be applied separately in 
     determining if such interest in any other trade or business 
     is a carryover business interest.
       ``(C) Individual ownership rules.--For purposes of this 
     section, an interest owned, directly or indirectly, by or for 
     an entity described in paragraph (1)(B) shall be considered 
     as being owned proportionately by or for the entity's 
     shareholders, partners, or beneficiaries. A person shall be 
     treated as a beneficiary of any trust only if such person has 
     a present interest in such trust.
       ``(e) Agreement.--The agreement referred to in this 
     subsection is a written agreement signed by each person in 
     being who has an interest (whether or not in possession) in 
     any property designated in such agreement consenting to the 
     application of this section with respect to such property.
       ``(f) Other Definitions and Applicable Rules.--For purposes 
     of this section--
       ``(1) Qualified heir.--The term `qualified heir' means a 
     United States citizen who is--
       ``(A) described in section 2032A(e)(1), or
       ``(B) an active employee of the trade or business to which 
     the carryover business interest relates if such employee has 
     been employed by such trade or business for a period of at 
     least 10 years before the date of the decedent's death.
       ``(2) Member of the family.--The term `member of the 
     family' has the meaning given to such term by section 
     2032A(e)(2).
       ``(3) Applicable rules.--Rules similar to the following 
     rules shall apply:
       ``(A) Section 2032A(b)(4) (relating to decedents who are 
     retired or disabled).
       ``(B) Section 2032A(e)(10) (relating to community 
     property).
       ``(C) Section 2032A(e)(14) (relating to treatment of 
     replacement property acquired in section 1031 or 1033 
     transactions).
       ``(D) Section 2032A(g) (relating to application to 
     interests in partnerships, corporations, and trusts).
       ``(4) Safe harbor for active entities held by entity 
     carrying on a trade or business.--For purposes of this 
     section, if--
       ``(A) an entity carrying on a trade or business owns 20 
     percent or more in value of the voting interests of another 
     entity, or such other entity has 15 or fewer owners, and
       ``(B) 80 percent or more of the value of the assets of each 
     such entity is attributable to assets used in an active 
     business operation, then the requirements under subsections 
     (b)(1)(C)(ii) and (d)(3)(D) shall be met with respect to an 
     interest in such an entity.''.
       (b) Carryover Basis Rules for Carryover Business 
     Interests.--Part II of subchapter O of chapter 1 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to basis rules of 
     general application) is amended by inserting after section 
     1022 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 1023. TREATMENT OF CARRYOVER BUSINESS INTERESTS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     section--
       ``(1) qualified property acquired from a decedent shall be 
     treated for purposes of this subtitle as transferred by gift, 
     and
       ``(2) the basis of the person acquiring qualified property 
     from such a decedent shall be the lesser of--
       ``(A) the adjusted basis of the decedent, or
       ``(B) the fair market value of the property at the date of 
     the decedent's death.
       ``(b) Qualified Property.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `qualified property' means the carryover business 
     interests of the decedent with respect to which an election 
     is made under section 2059(b)(1)(B).
       ``(c) Property Acquired From the Decedent.--For purposes of 
     this section, the following property shall be considered to 
     have been acquired from the decedent:
       ``(1) Property acquired by bequest, devise, or inheritance, 
     or by the decedent's estate from the decedent.
       ``(2) Property transferred by the decedent during his 
     lifetime--
       ``(A) to a qualified revocable trust (as defined in section 
     645(b)(1)), or
       ``(B) to any other trust with respect to which the decedent 
     reserved the right to make any change in the enjoyment 
     thereof through the exercise of a power to alter, amend, or 
     terminate the trust.
       ``(3) Any other property passing from the decedent by 
     reason of death to the extent that such property passed 
     without consideration.
       ``(d) Coordination With Section 691.--This section shall 
     not apply to property which constitutes a right to receive an 
     item of income in respect of a decedent under section 691.
       ``(e) Certain Liabilities Disregarded.--
       ``(1) In general.--In determining whether gain is 
     recognized on the acquisition of property--
       ``(A) from a decedent by a decedent's estate or any 
     beneficiary other than a tax-exempt beneficiary, and
       ``(B) from the decedent's estate by any beneficiary other 
     than a tax-exempt beneficiary, and in determining the 
     adjusted basis of such property, liabilities in excess of 
     basis shall be disregarded.
       ``(2) Tax-exempt beneficiary.--For purposes of paragraph 
     (1), the term `tax-exempt beneficiary' means--
       ``(A) the United States, any State or political subdivision 
     thereof, any possession of the United States, any Indian 
     tribal government (within the meaning of section 7871), or 
     any agency or instrumentality of any of the foregoing,
       ``(B) an organization (other than a cooperative described 
     in section 521) which is exempt from tax imposed by chapter 
     1,
       ``(C) any foreign person or entity (within the meaning of 
     section 168(h)(2)), and
       ``(D) to the extent provided in regulations, any person to 
     whom property is transferred for the principal purpose of tax 
     avoidance.
       ``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of 
     this section.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) The table of sections for part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 11 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 2058 the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 2059. Carryover business exclusion.''.

       (2) The table of sections for part II of subchapter O of 
     chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 1022 the following new item:

``Sec. 1023. Treatment of carryover business interests.''.

       (d) Effective Dates.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to estates of decedents dying, and gifts made--
       (1) after the date of the enactment of this Act, and before 
     January 1, 2010, and
       (2) after December 31, 2010.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Coburn, 
        Mr. Talent, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr. Isakson):
  S. 929. A bill to provide liability protection to nonprofit volunteer 
pilot organizations flying for public benefit and to the pilots and 
staff of such organizations; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of legislation that I 
reintroduced today with a number of my Senate colleagues--the Volunteer 
Pilot Organization Protection Act of 2005.
  The spirit of volunteerism is indelibly rooted in our Nation's 
history. From when early settlers landed in Jamestown in 1607 to when 
our citizen soldiers took up arms against the British Crown in the 
Revolutionary War, volunteerism has always been a part of American 
culture.
  But that unwavering spirit did not stop there, it has continued and 
thrived in many individuals and charitable organizations today. One 
such group of organizations that has selflessly given back so much to 
Virginians and Americans are charitable medical transportation systems 
operated by volunteer pilot organizations, VPOs.
  The mission and purpose of public benefit and non-profit volunteer 
pilot organizations involved in patient

[[Page 7950]]

transport is to ensure that no financially needy patient is denied 
access to distant specialized medical evaluation, diagnosis or 
treatment for lack of a means of long-distance medical air 
transportation. The principal goal is to remove the geographical and 
financial burdens that would deny access to specialized care.
  Last year public benefit flying non-profit volunteer pilot 
organizations provided long-distance, no-cost transportation for over 
40,000 patients and their escorts in times of special need. Mr. 
President, this year, that figure will likely grow to roughly 54,000 
people.
  One such organization that has played an intricate part in this 
mission is Angel Flight. Angel Flight is a not-for-profit grassroots 
organization with a volunteer corps of more than 6,200 volunteer 
pilots/plane owners--divided into six regions across the United 
States--who fly under the banner of Angel Flight America. Angel Flight 
provides flights of hope and healing by transporting patients and their 
families in private planes, free of charge, to hospitals for medical 
treatment.
  Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Department 
of Transportation and the FAA closed airports and grounded commercial 
air traffic, but the FAA allowed Angel Flight volunteers to fly. Angel 
Flight pilots flew firefighters, families of victims of the bombings, 
Red Cross personnel, medical and other supplies including the 
protective booties for the Search and Rescue dogs to New York and 
Washington, DC.
  In my years of public service, I have always maintained that we must 
provide access to care to all Virginians and Americans. Medical care 
should be available to all individuals. Sadly, our Nation is facing a 
medical crisis. Medical malpractice insurance costs and Medicare 
physician reimbursement are forcing many of our doctors to stop seeing 
``high-risk'' patients or Medicare beneficiaries and in some cases 
forcing our doctors to give up practice altogether and retire. As a 
result, patients have to travel great distances to receive the medical 
care that they need to live happy, healthy and productive lives. 
Unfortunately, a number of these patients do not have the financial 
means to travel long distances, thus, ultimately denying patients 
access to life-saving or quality of life improving specialized 
treatment.
  We can say the same with patients who rely on volunteer pilot 
organizations such as Angel Flight or one of its subsidiary groups like 
Mercy Medical Airlift in my home Commonwealth of Virginia. 
Unfortunately, due to the public's apparent notion that organizations 
that use airplanes are financially well-off and have deep pockets, many 
of the volunteer pilot organizations are open to frivolous and junk 
lawsuits. This leads to an access to care issue.
  Also, aviation insurance has skyrocketed up in price and non-owned 
aircraft liability insurance is no longer reasonably available to 
volunteer pilot organizations. Many insurance companies had always 
provided this type of insurance but post September 11, 2001, this 
insurance is scarcely found and if found, the costs have increased 
greatly, to the astronomical sums of $5 million a year. Because of the 
exorbitant costs of insurance, volunteer pilot organizations have a 
difficult time recruiting and retaining pilots and professional 
persons.
  I would like to submit an editorial written by the Virginian Pilot. 
This editorial correctly identifies the obstacles that these volunteer 
pilot organizations have to go through. I would like that editorial 
inserted here.
  That is why I decided to introduce the Volunteer Pilot Organization 
Protection Act. In 1997, Congress passed the Volunteer Protection Act, 
which handled much of the liability issue for volunteer endeavors in 
the country; however, this legislation did not adequately address 
aviation-related matters.
  My bill amends the highly regarded Good Samaritan Act to provide 
necessary liability protections in the area of charitable medical air 
transportation and promote volunteer pilot organizations. More 
specifically, this legislation will protect volunteer pilot 
organizations, their boards and small paid staff and nonflying 
volunteers from liability should there be an accident. The VPOs are 
simply the ``match-makers'' between the volunteer pilot willing to help 
a neighbor and the needy patient family. The pilot has full and sole 
responsibility for conducting the flight in a safe manner in accordance 
with Federal Aviation Regulations. In addition, this legislation will 
provide liability protection for the individual volunteer pilot over 
and above the liability insurance that they are required to carry.
  Furthermore, the Volunteer Pilot Protection Act will provide 
liability protection for ``referring agencies'' who tell their patients 
that the charitable flight service is available. Referring hospitals 
and clinics are becoming unwilling to inform their patients that 
charitable medical air transportation help is available for fear of a 
liability against them should something happen in a subsequent 
volunteer pilot flight. Hence, organizations like the Shriners Hospital 
System and the American Cancer Society would be able to make known 
available volunteer pilot services to transport their patients to 
Shriners or other hospitals where they receive care.
  I know a few people have concerns that this bill would provide 
blanket immunity to Volunteer Pilot Organizations but I want to stress 
that my bill requires insurance on the part of the pilot and if there 
is negligence on behalf of the pilot, the injured party does have legal 
recourse. This bill does not provide blanket immunity to VPOs, but has 
been carefully worded to allow legal action to be brought against the 
insurance policy of the pilot in event of negligence.
  By providing volunteer pilots with liability protection, insurance 
rates for these pilots will ultimately be reduced. Therefore, more 
pilots will be able to afford insurance and fly for the public good. 
With less-costly insurance available, I am confident that more pilots 
will generously give their time to fly for and help the medically 
needy.
  This bill enjoys the support of a number of charitable organizations, 
including the Children's Organ Transplant Association, the National 
Organization for Rare Disorders, the Air Care Alliance, the Independent 
Charities of America, the Health and Medical Research Charities of 
America, the National Association of Hospital Hospitality Houses, and 
many others.
  Not only does this legislation enjoy the support of numerous 
charitable organizations, it also enjoyed the support of the United 
States House of Representatives. On September 14, 2004, the House of 
Representatives passed the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act 
of2004 by a vote of 385-12. Mr. President, this is a clear indication 
that this bill has broad bipartisan support in the House and I know the 
House will once again pass this commonsense legislation.
  I am confident that this legislation will start a trend to help curb 
the large amounts of counterproductive lawsuits, lower insurance costs, 
and promote the spirit of volunteerism that has been rooted in the 
framework of our country's storied history. I, along with the volunteer 
pilots and organizations, and with the thousands of families who rely 
and may rely on the help of volunteer pilot organizations, urge the 
Senate to quickly and finally pass this legislation in the 109th 
Congress.
  I would like to thank Congresswoman Thelma Drake, our newest member 
to the Virginia team, for taking over this legislation for former 
Congressman Ed Schrock and introducing the companion bill on the House 
side. In addition, I would also like to thank the original cosponsors 
of this legislation, Senators Chambliss, Inhofe, Coburn, Talent, 
Cornyn, and Isakson for their support as we work to pass this vitally 
necessary legislation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 [From the (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot, 
                             Mar. 11, 2003]

             Shield Helpful Pilots From Frivolous Lawsuits

       In the realm of volunteers, few outshine the generous folks 
     at Angel Flight.
       This nonprofit organization flies patients for whom air 
     transport would be otherwise

[[Page 7951]]

     unaffordable to medical facilities around the country. 
     Private pilots spirit individuals to dialysis, chemotherapy 
     sessions, organ transplants and other surgeries by donating 
     their aircraft and their valuable time. The goal is a noble 
     one: to ensure that no one in need is denied medical care for 
     lack of long-distance transportation.
       But in our lawsuit-happy society, even these warmhearted 
     souls can't escape the possibility of landing in court. While 
     a law known as the Volunteer Protection Act shields most 
     people who give their time to worthy causes from frivolous 
     suits, it doesn't cover volunteer pilots or flight 
     organizers. Liability insurance costs for Angel Flight and 
     similar nonprofits have skyrocketed from $1,000 to more than 
     $25,000 annually.
       This prohibitive price tag threatens the future of Angel 
     Flight, which is funded solely through donations. A 
     spokeswoman for Angel Flight Mid-Atlantic, headquartered in 
     Virginia Beach, said the burden will ultimately fall on sick 
     and needy patients. And with 600 volunteer pilots 
     transporting an average of 100 medical cases a month, 
     literally thousands of lives may be affected by this 
     oversight in the law.
       Fortunately, lawmakers are paying attention. U.S. Rep. Ed 
     Schrock recently introduced bipartisan legislation to add 
     volunteer-pilot organizations to the ranks of those covered 
     by the Volunteer Protection Act. U.S. Sen. George Allen is 
     expected to introduce a similar measure in the Senate. 
     Congress should pass these bills, the sooner the better. 
     Keeping Angel Flight aloft is literally a life-and-death 
     matter.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Dodd):
  S. 930. A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with 
respect to drug safety, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I introduce Senate Bill 930, the 
Food and Drug Administration Safety Act of 2005. I am pleased that 
Senator Dodd is co-sponsoring another piece of drug safety legislation 
with me. This legislation is part of a sustained effort to restore 
public confidence in the Federal Government's food and drug safety 
agency. Enactment of this bill will be another meaningful step toward 
greater accountability and transparency at the FDA. Importantly, this 
legislation provides the FDA with some much needed authorities to 
ensure the safety and efficacy of drugs for the long haul.
  The Food and Drug Administration cannot always serve the American 
people and the interests of the drug industry at the same time. These 
two interests are often at odds with each other. When there is a 
conflict the American people should win out each and every time. The 
Vioxx situation is a classic example of this inherent conflict. 
American consumers demand and deserve assurances that the medicines in 
their cabinets are safe. The risks associated with a drug should be 
outweighed by its benefits, and this risk-benefit analysis should not 
be negotiated by the industry behind closed doors. Unfortunately, 
reforms at the FDA are necessary to place drug safety front and center 
once and for all.
  When drugs go on the market, they are used by exponentially larger 
numbers of people than were involved in the pre-approval trials. What 
John Q. Public deserves and demands is for the FDA to embrace a renewed 
mission to pursue aggressively key safety questions that the industry 
would sometimes prefer to ignore. The FDA must protect the health of 
the public by considering not only the benefits but also the risks of 
drugs for the tens of millions of Americans who actually use new drugs 
already available in the marketplace. The FDA's post-market evaluation 
and research needs to be a separate but equal partner with pre-approval 
evaluation. Indeed FDA's post marketing surveillance function can no 
longer take a back seat within the agency.
  I have been pressing for necessary reforms at the FDA--both 
administrative and legislative--and the focus of these reforms center 
on a reorganization of the FDA. The Food and Drug Administration Safety 
Act of 2005 will establish an independent Center within the FDA--the 
Center for Post-market Drug Evaluation and Research (CPDER). The new 
Center's primary mission, vision and values will focus on conducting 
risk assessment for approved drugs and biological products once they 
are on the market. The Director of the Center will report directly to 
the FDA Commissioner and will be responsible for monitoring and 
assessing the safety and efficacy of drugs and biological products.
  Today's legislation is focused on the equal importance of pre-
marketing evaluations by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research 
(CDER)--the pre-market Center--and post-marketing evaluations by the 
newly established post-market Center. Consultation and coordination 
between pre-market and post-market Centers will be essential, but their 
relationship will place them on equal footing with the other. The 
present Office of Drug Safety will no longer be effectively under the 
thumb of the Office of New Drugs. We are hopeful that this 
reorganization of the FDA will go a long way toward eliminating the 
conflict of interest that shadows the FDA's post-market risk assessment 
presently.
  Today's legislation will also: authorize the Director to require 
manufacturers to conduct post-market clinical or observational studies 
if there are questions about the safety or efficacy of a drug or 
biological product.
  Authorize the Director to determine whether an approved drug or 
licensed biological product may present an unreasonable risk to the 
health of patients or the general public, given the known benefits.
  Authorize the Director to take corrective action if a drug or 
biological product presents an unreasonable risk to patients or the 
general public--including the authority to make changes to the label or 
approved indication, place restrictions on product distribution, 
require physician and consumer education, and require the use of other 
risk management tools.
  Allow the Director to withdraw approval of a drug or biological 
product if necessary to protect the public health.
  Require submission of advertising prior to dissemination, and certain 
advertising disclosures related to risks and benefits to patients, if 
one or more of the three following conditions is met: the Director has 
determined that the product may present an unreasonable risk to 
patients, the product is the subject of an outstanding post-market 
study requirement, or the product was approved within the last two 
years.
  Establish strong enforcement mechanisms, including civil monetary 
penalties, for those who fail to comply.
  Ensure that the Director benefits from all appropriate resources, 
including but not limited to consultation with the Center for Drug 
Evaluation and Research (CDER) or the Center for Biologics Evaluation 
and Research (CBER), and makes all decisions based on a risk-benefit 
analysis.
  Ensure that all findings and decisions made by CPDER are transparent.
  Require a report and recommendations to Congress on post-market 
surveillance of medical devices.
  Authorize graduated appropriations totaling $500 million over five 
years to ensure that CPDER has the resources to accomplish its goals.
  Today's legislation is another important step toward reforming the 
FDA. I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort by cosponsoring 
this important legislation.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Grassley in 
announcing the introduction of the Food and Drug Administration Safety 
Act of 2005 (FDASA). I would like to thank Senator Grassley for his 
commitment to this issue and his willingness to work on this important 
legislation in a bipartisan manner. Senator Grassley and I have spent 
the past several months crafting this legislation, which will create a 
new center within the FDA that will be responsible for ensuring that 
prescription drugs are safe once they are on the market.
  Our hope is that the creation of this new center will restore 
confidence in the medicines that so many Americans rely on to safeguard 
their health and well-being. Patients should be able to rest-assured 
that the drugs they take to help them will not hurt them instead.
  The American pharmaceutical industry is a true success story. Their 
incredible innovations over the last few decades have saved and 
improved millions of lives, and made prescription drugs an integral 
part of quality health care. I am proud to say that Connecticut is home 
to a number of leading pharmaceutical companies. There

[[Page 7952]]

is very little question that the American drug industry is the world 
leader. This is due, in no small part, to the FDA. Throughout the 
world, the FDA seal of approval--the words ``FDA Approved''--has stood 
as the gold standard for safety and quality.
  Unfortunately, events of the past year have put patients at risk and 
have seriously tarnished the FDA's image. Recent developments have cast 
into doubt the FDA's ability to ensure that the drugs that it approves 
are safe--especially once they are on the market. These concerns are 
bad for patients, bad for physicians, and bad for the drug industry.
  Like many Americans, I have been deeply disturbed by the revelations 
of significant risk associated with widely used medications to treat 
pain and depression. These revelations raise real and legitimate 
questions about the safety of drugs that have already been approved. It 
would be one thing if these drugs were in a trial phase, but safety 
issues are being identified in drugs that are already on the market and 
widely used. Health risks significant enough to remove drugs from the 
market or significantly restrict their use are becoming clear only 
after millions of Americans have been exposed to real or potential 
harm.
  It has been estimated that more than 100,000 Americans might have 
been seriously injured or killed by a popular pain medication, while 
millions of children have been prescribed antidepres-
sants that could put them at risk. This recent spate of popular 
medicines being identified as unsafe underscores the need to take 
additional steps to monitor and protect safety after a drug has been 
approved.
  The legislation that Senator Grassley and I are introducing today 
will do three things to restore confidence in the words ``FDA 
Approved,'' and ensure that the FDA has all the tools that it needs to 
protect patients. First and foremost, it will establish within the FDA 
a new center--the Center for Postmarket Drug Evaluation and Research 
(CPDER)--which will report directly to the FDA Commissioner and be 
responsible for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of drugs and 
biological products once they are on the market.
  I strongly believe that the creation of such a new, independent 
center is necessary. There have been disturbing reports that suggest 
that the FDA does not place enough emphasis on drug safety, and that 
concerns raised by those in the Office of Drug Safety (ODS) are 
sometimes ignored and even suppressed. An internal study conducted by 
the HHS Office of the Inspector General in 2002 revealed that 
approximately one-fifth of drug reviewers had been pressured to approve 
a drug despite concerns about safety, efficacy, or quality. In 
addition, more than one-third said they were ``not at all'' or only 
``somewhat'' confident that final decisions of the Center for Drug 
Evaluation and Research (CDER) adequately assessed safety. The creation 
of a new center will raise the profile of drug safety within the 
agency.
  Second, our bill will provide the Director of CPDER with significant 
new authorities, including: the authority to require drug companies to 
conduct postmarket studies of their products if there are questions 
about safety or effectiveness; the authority to take corrective 
actions, such as labeling changes, restricted distribution, and other 
risk management tools, if an unreasonable risk exists; the authority to 
review drug advertisements before they are disseminated, and to require 
certain disclosures about increased risk; and in extreme cases, the 
authority to pull the product off the market.
  These new authorities will allow the FDA to act quickly to get 
answers when there are questions about the safety of a drug, and to act 
decisively to mitigate the risks when the evidence shows that a drug 
presents a safety issue. With these authorities, we will never again 
have a situation where a critical labeling change takes two years to 
complete, as was the case with Vioxx. When we are talking about drugs 
that are already on the market and in widespread use, any delay can put 
millions of patients in harm's way.
  Third and lastly, this legislation will authorize the appropriation 
of $500 million over the next 5 years to provide the new center with 
the resources to carry out the provisions of this legislation.
  I would like to thank several groups that have endorsed this bill, 
and that were instrumental in its drafting, including Consumer's Union, 
the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, the National 
Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD), the National Women's Health 
Network (NWHN), the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), the 
Consumer Federation of America, and the Center for Medical Consumers.
  I look forward to working with all of my colleagues, including 
Senator Enzi and Senator Kennedy on the HELP Committee, to see this 
legislation enacted as soon as possible. By strengthening the ability 
of the FDA to ensure the safety of prescription drugs once they are on 
the market, this legislation will allow physicians to prescribe, and 
patients to use, prescription drugs without wondering if the medicines 
intended to help them will hurt them instead. It will help ensure that 
the term ``FDA-Approved'' will remain the gold standard for safety and 
quality.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BURNS:
  S. 931. A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on certain articles of 
natural cork; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
address the difference between the import tariff placed on unfinished 
cork and refined cork. Unfinished cork has a higher import tariff than 
already-refined cork--this problem is in need of a resolution.
  Unfinished cork is the principal element of a fishing pole's grip and 
must be imported as it is not available domestically. Many fishing rod 
companies reside in Montana, such as the R.L. Winston Rod Company of 
Twin Bridges. I am aware that fishing rod manufacturers, particularly 
fly-fishing rod manufacturers, are under pressure to increase the price 
of their equipment because of prohibitively high tariff on the import 
of unfinished cork. While the tariff on already-finished cork is 6 
percent, unfinished cork is subject to a 14 percent tariff. It just 
does not make good sense to charge a significantly higher levy on an 
unfinished product that is imported and then handcrafted by American 
workers.
  This inconsistency must end by leveling the difference between the 
two tariffs. The reduction will enable American workers to continue 
manufacturing custom-made fishing rod grips, keep the price of all 
fishing poles down, and bring a measure of common sense to this portion 
of our tariff law. Once resolved, domestic businesses will be able to 
finish fly rods here, leading to an increasingly competitive place in 
the market for American goods. With this change Montana's small 
businesses will benefit as will our overall economy in the state.
  I am pleased that some of my colleagues in the House have decided to 
assist in this effort. I truly appreciate the work of Representative 
Simmons of Connecticut, who is leading this legislation in the House. 
He has already signed on 17 co-sponsors to this legislation at last 
count. His assistance has been invaluable, and I look forward to 
working with him as this legislation moves forward.
  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. 931

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

     SECTION 1. CERTAIN ARTICLES OF NATURAL CORK.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the 
     Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by 
     inserting in numerical sequence the following new heading:

       

[[Page 7953]]



``    9902.45.03    Articles of       6%                No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     natural cork                                                            31/2008          ''
                     (provided for                                                                             .
                     in subheading
                     4503.90.60)....

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     applies with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
     warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. 
        Murray, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Corzine, Mr. 
        Akaka, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Dayton):
  S. 932. A bill to provide for paid sick leave to ensure that 
Americans can address their own health needs and the health needs of 
their families; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the ability of American families to live 
the American dream is becoming harder and harder. With each passing 
month, it's more difficult for families to earn a living--to pay the 
mortgage and the doctor bills, and send their sons and daughters to 
college.
  In the Bush economy, families are worried about their job security, 
their income, and the cost of living. They're working longer and harder 
and finding it more and more difficult to balance their work and their 
family responsibilities.
  Most Americans assume that paid sick days are a right. They're not. 
Half of all American workers are not guaranteed the right to time off 
when they're ill, without losing their pay, or even their job.
  In 1993, Congress and the administration guaranteed unpaid leave for 
millions of working men and women to deal with serious medical 
problems.
  It's time to build on this success, and ensure that millions of 
workers can also take time off when they need an annual check-up, when 
their children are sick with a cold, and when their ailing elderly 
parents need to be taken to the doctor.
  Hard-working men and women deserve better. That's why Congresswoman 
DeLauro and I are introducing legislation to guarantee workers 7 days 
of paid sick leave a year to care for their own medical needs and those 
of their family members. This proposal covers workers at all 
businesses, except small businesses with fewer than 15 employees.
  This is a family issue. When my son was diagnosed with cancer in his 
leg as a child, and had to undergo surgery, I was able to take the time 
I needed to be there for him. But year after year, countless employees 
have to choose between the job they need and the family they love. 
Families deserve the flexibility to care for each other when they get 
sick.
  It's an economic issue. Paid sick days actually save businesses money 
through reduced turnover and increased productivity. A recent study by 
Cornell University examined the problem of employees coming to work 
despite medical problems. They found it costs business $180 billion 
annually in lost productivity.
  It's also a public health issue. Too often, employees come to work 
sick and co-workers and many others can easily be infected. Recently, a 
court ruled that because of the lack of paid sick leave, a stomach 
virus in one worker infected 600 guests and 300 employees at the Reno 
Hilton Hotel in Nevada.
  Paid sick days will help prevent the spread of illnesses like that. 
Taking time off to treat illnesses and injuries will save health costs 
in the long run. It will make an important difference for insurers, for 
hospitals, and for the health of millions of Americans.
  It's long past time to provide paid sick days for workers. This bill 
is a first step to guarantee that every worker who needs sick leave has 
it and can afford to take it.

                          ____________________