[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 17732-17737]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Ms. STABENOW:
  S. 3888. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
sunset the sustainable growth rate formula as of January 1, 2009, in 
order to expedite Congressional action in establishing a new physician 
payment system that would appropriately reimburse physicians by keeping 
pace with increases in medical practice costs and providing stable, 
positive Medicare updates; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the ``Fix and 
Improve Reimbursement (FAIR) for Physicians Act of 2006'' today with 
the support of the Michigan State Medical Society and the Michigan 
Osteopathic Association.
  Over 20,000 M.D.'s and D.O.'s in Michigan provide more than 1.4 
million seniors and people with disabilities with high-quality medical 
services under the Medicare program. Our Michigan families have 
received fantastic care, from fantastic doctors.
  But will they continue to? Not unless we do something about the 
payment system used to reimburse physicians for Medicare services. 
Beginning January 1, 2007, the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) 
formula will cut payments to physicians and health care professionals 
by 5.1 percent. What does that mean in dollar terms? Medicare payments 
in Michigan alone will be cut by $137 million in 2007; the average cut 
for a physician in Michigan would be $34,000 per year.
  That doesn't make any sense. Medical costs are going up. How can 
doctors provide the same high-quality care when costs are going up and 
their payments are going down?
  It makes even less sense when you realize physicians and other health 
care professionals have been struggling with this payment system for 
years. The SGR formula resulted in significant payment cuts in 2002, 
and would have resulted in payment cuts in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 
had Congress not intervened.
  And it won't stop with the cut in 2007. According to the Medicare 
Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) and the Board of Trustees of the 
Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Supplementary 
Medical Insurance Trust Fund, the Medicare SGR formula will result in 
substantial payment cuts to physicians and health care professionals 
through at least 2015.
  The cuts are scheduled to total 40 percent by 2015, costing Michigan 
doctors in excess of $8 billion between 2007 and 2015.
  Can doctors absorb these kinds of cuts and continue to serve all 
Medicare beneficiaries with high-quality care? Absolutely not. The cuts 
would be particularly devastating for primary care doctors, the very 
doctors that, according to MedPAC, many Medicare beneficiaries rely on 
for important health care management. MedPAC states in their March 2006 
report that they ``are

[[Page 17733]]

concerned that such consecutive annual cuts would threaten access to 
physician care services over time, particularly primary care 
services.'' They go on to say that ``payment policies that may 
discourage medical students and residents from becoming primary care 
physicians raise particular concern''.
  A recent survey conducted by the AMA suggests that if the scheduled 
cuts go into effect, 45 percent of doctors will decrease the number of 
Medicare patients they accept--and this at a time that the Medicare 
population is burgeoning! Further, 50 percent of doctors will defer 
purchase of health information technology, 37 percent of doctors 
practicing in rural communities will be forced to discontinue rural 
outreach services, and 43 percent of physicians will decrease the 
number of new TRICARE patients they suggest.
  This is not a new issue. MedPAC considers the Medicare SGR formula a 
flawed, inequitable mechanism for controlling the volume of services 
and first recommended repeal of the Medicare SGR formula in 2001. Since 
then they have consistently recommended repealing the formula.
  But what has Congress done? Have we repealed the SGR? No. Instead, 
each year since 2003 Congress has acted to override the formula 
temporarily. While these actions have prevented cuts since 2002, nobody 
can believe this is a good way of going about business. Congress tends 
to act very late in the year--or AFTER the cuts have actually gone into 
effect--which results in instability and unpredictability for 
physicians, health care professionals, seniors and individuals with 
disabilities.
  Further, annual Congressional actions to override SGR don't solve the 
long-term problem as the formula extracts the added spending in future 
years by imposing even more drastic cuts.
  We know what we need to do. A Medicare physician payment system that 
will provide stable, positive payment updates is critical to preserve 
Medicare beneficiaries' access to high-quality care and allow doctors 
to invest in health information technology and quality improvement 
programs.
  While a new system is being developed, we know we need to adopt 
MedPAC's recommendation to update payments for physicians' services 
under the Medicare program by the projected change in input prices less 
MedPAC's expectation for productivity growth. The ``Preserving Patient 
Access to Physicians Act of 2005'', which I introduced last year with 
Senator Kyl, would do just that. It would have provided physicians with 
a 2.7 percent update in 2006 and would provide a 2.8 percent update in 
2007.
  When I introduced that legislation I said that it was just the 
beginning. I said that our bill was necessary to provide updates for a 
couple of years but that we cannot continue to use stop-gap measures, 
and must replace the SGR with a payment system that actually makes 
sense and reflects the costs of providing physician care to Medicare 
beneficiaries.
  This bill--the ``Fix and Improve Reimbursement (FAIR) for Physicians 
Act of 2006''--takes the next step. The purpose of the ``FAIR for 
Physicians Act'' is to sunset the Medicare sustainable growth rate 
formula in order to expedite Congressional action in establishing a new 
physician payment system under the Medicare program that would 
appropriately reimburse physicians by keeping pace with increases in 
medical practice costs and providing stable, positive Medicare updates.
  The ``Fair for Physicians Act'' would repeal the SGR formula as of 
January 1, 2009. I continue to believe that we must adopt MedPAC's 
recommendation for updates in 2007 and 2008 to give seniors access to 
high-quality care while giving Congress time to develop an alternative 
payment system.
  To help Congress with developing the new payment system, the ``Fair 
for Physicians Act'' establishes a new, 17 member ``Physician Payment 
Update Commission'', the ``Physician Commission''. The members of the 
Physician Commission will include members with a wide variety of 
expertise in the delivery and financing of health care, but--and I 
believe this is critical--individuals who are physicians and other 
health professionals shall constitute a majority of the membership of 
the Commission.
  The new Physician Commission will study all matters relating to 
payment rates under the Medicare physician fee schedule, and develop 
recommendations on the establishment of a new system that would 
appropriately reimburse physicians by keeping pace with increases in 
medical practice costs.
  We need to do this right, but we also need to get it done soon. Our 
physicians and health care professionals, and our Medicare 
beneficiaries, have been dealing with an unworkable, unsustainable 
system for too long.
  Therefore, the Physician Commission must report to the appropriate 
Congressional Committees and MedPAC by December 1, 2007. MedPAC then 
has a month to review the recommendations of the Physician Commission 
and submit a report to the appropriate Committees. MedPAC's report must 
include a review of the recommendations, including the reasons for 
their support if they support their recommendations and, if they do not 
support the recommendations, the reasons for that, and their own 
recommendations.
  I know we need to get this done by January 1, 2009 and I know we can 
get this done by January 1, 2009. My bill would repeal the SGR formula 
as of that date, and establish a new Commission to develop a new 
payment system by that time, to ensure that our Nation's 42 million 
Medicare beneficiaries continue to have access to high quality 
physician care.
  In the meantime, we must provide updates based on MedPAC's 
recommendations.
  The Medicare program is one of the most successful federal programs 
of all time. It has lifted countless seniors out of poverty, and it has 
ensured access to necessary, affordable, quality medical care for our 
most vulnerable citizens for the last 40 years.
  We can--and must--fix the physician payment formula to maintain 
Medicare's record of success in providing access to high-quality 
Medicare services for all of our seniors and people with disabilities.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 3889. A bill to enhance housing and emergency assistance to 
victims of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma of 2005, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing the gulf coast 
Housing Accessibility Act to address some of the challenges facing 
survivors of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita a year after the hurricanes 
struck the gulf coast. Two weeks ago, we commemorated the anniversary 
of Hurricane Katrina and honored those who lost their lives and those 
who lost their livelihoods last year. A year later, the people of New 
Orleans and the gulf coast continue to deal with an unfortunate 
reality--that in a lot of neighborhoods, it looks like the hurricanes 
hit a week ago, not a year ago.
  Over the past year, I have heard from a number of Wisconsinites upset 
with the Federal Government's response to Katrina. They have made 
powerful pleas to not forget about the people who lost their homes, 
their communities and their way of life.
  In July, I visited some neighborhoods in the New Orleans area that 
were ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. The painful realities about life 
there were everywhere--abandoned businesses, and homes and 
neighborhoods that were totally destroyed by the hurricane and its 
aftermath. The challenge of rebuilding is enormous. But what's even 
tougher is trying to rebuild in a way that helps everyone come back, 
not just people with access to more resources and different options. It 
is the responsibility of all levels of government to help those who 
want to come back regardless of their income level. We must ensure that 
the rebuilt gulf coast reflects the same cultural diversity that made 
it an American gem before the hurricanes struck. This legislation seeks 
to meet some of that responsibility by providing low income individuals 
and families with immediate and long term housing assistance

[[Page 17734]]

as they rebuild their lives and move back to the gulf coast.
  There are so many ways that gulf coast communities still need help--
creating jobs, rebuilding the school systems, and gutting damaged homes 
so that they can be rebuilt. And, when you see those blocks and blocks 
of neighborhoods that were destroyed--with no sign of reconstruction--
it's clear just how much help the people of New Orleans and the gulf 
coast need to find affordable housing.
  Housing has to be affordable so that the gulf coast can get back to 
work. So many of the people who are the lifeblood of the tourism 
industry--like hotel and restaurant workers--want to call New Orleans 
home again, but they can't move back if they can't afford any place to 
live.
  It's a testament to the strength of these communities that so many 
people want to come back, at every income level. You can't do that if 
you were working a minimum wage job that doesn't exist anymore, and you 
were renting an apartment that ended up engulfed in flood water.
  There are a lot of barriers to moving back for homeowners, but it's 
also tough for gulf coast citizens who were renting when the hurricane 
hit. In the year since the hurricane struck, rents in the gulf coast 
region have skyrocketed, which makes it even more difficult for low 
income renters to return to their homes. With a significant percentage 
of renters in the New Orleans area before Katrina, we need to ensure 
that the housing assistance in the gulf coast is aimed at helping 
renters, as well as homeowners, rebuild their lives.
  We've got to do something to help displaced residents--particularly 
low-income individuals--who want to move back to New Orleans. I have 
put together a few different ideas into one bill, building on some 
really good work on housing issues by some of my colleagues in the 
Senate. This bill doesn't tackle every problem, but it will help 
address some of the tough housing issues facing New Orleans and the 
gulf coast. It includes housing vouchers to help make rents affordable 
for the lowest income people and families. It also makes housing like 
the Katrina cottages--which are more like homes, and less like 
trailers--more available to those who want them. There have been a lot 
of problems with the FEMA trailers, so it's important to give people 
the option of living in a more permanent home. And finally it allows 
HUD to handle temporary rental assistance programs from here on out, 
instead of FEMA, which isn't equipped to handle housing issues like 
these for the long haul.
  Not only does this legislation address the needs of current Katrina 
survivors, but the changes it makes to the Stafford Act to allow FEMA 
to provide permanent and semi-permanent housing, as well as allowing 
HUD to provide temporary housing assistance instead of FEMA, apply to 
future disasters also. The importance of this cannot be stressed 
enough--we in government must learn from our past mistakes and work to 
prevent such a horrible government response to future disasters.
  A year after Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita, there is so much 
that we can still do--and that Congress can do--to help the gulf coast 
recover. We need to have serious conversations about the persistent 
poverty that still exists in the gulf coast and around our nation, for 
this poverty magnified the disaster of Hurricane Katrina. We need to 
develop solutions to address this poverty that exists in cities and 
rural communities throughout our country. We need to work to ensure the 
levees are built correctly. We need to better protect the diminishing 
wetlands of the gulf coast. But we also have to focus on the here and 
now--what people are facing on the gulf coast today. As we look at the 
images of the hurricanes a year later, and we remember what people went 
through, we also have to recognize how far we have to go, and 
rededicate ourselves to helping the people of the gulf coast make it 
home again.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3889

       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 ``Gulf Coast Housing 
     Accessibility Act of 2006''.

     SEC. 2. PROJECT-BASED VOUCHERS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development (in this Act referred to as the ``Secretary'') 
     shall allocate additional assistance for project-based 
     housing vouchers under section 8(o)(13) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) for individuals 
     and households located within the area in which assistance to 
     individuals has been authorized by the President under a 
     declaration of a major disaster under the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as a 
     consequence of Hurricane Katrina, Rita, or Wilma of 2005.
       (b) Authorized Uses.--The Secretary shall make funds 
     available under this section for project-based vouchers used 
     to support--
       (1) affordable housing in repaired or rebuilt housing that 
     has been damaged or destroyed as a consequence of Hurricane 
     Katrina, Rita, or Wilma of 2005; or
       (2) to support affordable housing in new housing structures 
     in the affected areas created under the low income housing 
     tax credit under section 42 or section 1400N(c) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
       (c) Funds.--
       (1) In general.--Of amounts authorized under this section, 
     funds shall be made available for 4,500 project-based 
     vouchers for--
       (A) support of housing units for persons, including adults 
     and children, with disabilities;
       (B) elderly families; and
       (C) individuals and families who were homeless prior to the 
     occurrence of the disaster.
       (2) Definitions.--As used in this subsection:
       (A) Disability.--The term ``disability'' has the same 
     meaning as in section 422(2) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11382(2)).
       (B) Homeless.--The term ``homeless'' has the same meaning 
     as the term ``homeless children and youths'' as defined in 
     section 725(2) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 11434a(2)), except that such term shall also 
     include any adult individual who is homeless.
       (d) Requests for Assistance.--The Secretary shall award the 
     project-based vouchers authorized under this section to a 
     State agency designated by the Governor of the State, upon 
     submission of a request to the Secretary, in such form and 
     containing such information as the Secretary may require. If 
     a State agency is unable to provide such a request, a local 
     housing agency may submit the request for funds to implement 
     project-based vouchers under this section. If a State agency 
     enters into an agreement with 1 or more local housing 
     agencies to transfer the administration of vouchers after 
     commitment to a particular development, the Secretary shall 
     make the appropriate transfer.
       (e) Exemption From Certain Limitations.--The limitation 
     provided for in section 8(o)(13)(B) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)(B)) shall not 
     apply to the project-based vouchers allocated and 
     administered under this section.
       (f) Authorization of Funds.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary $200,000,000 for purposes of allocating and 
     administering project-based assistance under section 8(o)(13) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f(o)(13)), which shall remain available until expended.
       (2) Purpose.--Such funds are authorized for the purpose of 
     ensuring that 25 percent of the units created, repaired, or 
     refurbished under the low income housing tax credit under 
     section 42 or section 1400N(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986, are affordable to very low-income and extremely low-
     income individuals and households.
       (g) Effective Date.--This section shall become effective 
     upon appropriation of the necessary funds to carry out this 
     section.
       (h) Offset.--Section 843(a) of title 18, United states 
     Code, is amended by--
       (1) inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)''; and
       (2) adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) The Attorney General shall collect a user fee from 
     each licensee under this section of $0.02 per pound for any 
     commercial, non-military explosive material manufactured in 
     or imported into the United States by that licensee.''.

     SEC. 3. FEMA HOUSING ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Amendments to Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act.--Section 408(c)(1) of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5174(c)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in the paragraph heading, by inserting ``semipermanent, 
     and permanent'' after ``temporary''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)
       (A) in clause (i)--
       (i) by inserting ``semipermanent, and permanent'' after 
     ``temporary''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``subject to certain conditions outlined 
     below'' after ``units'';
       (B) by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iii) as clauses 
     (iii) and (iv), respectively; and

[[Page 17735]]

       (C) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
       ``(ii) Conditions for providing temporary, semipermanent, 
     and permanent housing units.--

       ``(I) In general.--When determining whether to provide 
     temporary, semipermanent, or permanent housing under clause 
     (i), the President shall examine certain conditions, 
     including--

       ``(aa) the relative cost efficiency of providing the 
     housing units;
       ``(bb) the likelihood that individuals and families will be 
     living in Federal Emergency Management Agency (in this 
     subparagraph referred to as `FEMA') assisted housing longer 
     than 3 to 6 months, due to the scope of the disaster where 
     individuals and households are located;
       ``(cc) the potential benefits of providing housing that 
     will help to restore permanent housing stock lost as a result 
     of the disaster; and
       ``(dd) any other conditions that the President deems 
     necessary to examine, depending on the scope of the disaster 
     and the subsequent rebuilding and recovery process.

       ``(II) Meeting needs.--When providing temporary, 
     semipermanent, or permanent housing units under clause (i), 
     the President shall ensure that--

       ``(aa) an adequate share of the housing units will be 
     deployed to meet the needs of predisaster renters, especially 
     low-income households;
       ``(bb) that the deployment of the housing units will 
     minimize the concentration of poverty;
       ``(cc) that an adequate share of the housing units is 
     accessible for persons with disabilities, as that term is 
     defined in section 422(2) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11382(2)); and
       ``(dd) the housing units will be placed within a reasonable 
     distance from needed services, such as access to 
     transportation, employment opportunities, health care 
     facilities, schools, day care services, and financial and 
     employment counseling.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made 
     by this section shall apply with respect to individuals and 
     households affected--
       (1) by a disaster to which section 408(c)(1) of the Robert 
     T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5174(c)(1)) would otherwise apply, occurring on or 
     after the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (2) by the consequences of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and 
     Wilma of 2005.

     SEC. 4. TRANSFER OF TEMPORARY RENTAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--The Director of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Director'' and ``FEMA'', respectively) shall enter into a 
     mission assignment with the Secretary to transfer adequate 
     funds from FEMA Disaster Relief Funds into the Disaster 
     Voucher Program at the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development in order to fully implement subsection (b).
       (b) Transfers.--The Director shall ensure that the 
     following individuals and households are transferred into the 
     Disaster Voucher Program:
       (1) Individuals and households receiving assistance through 
     FEMA's transitional housing program authorized under section 
     408 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5174) .
       (2) Individuals and households receiving assistance 
     through--
       (A) rental assistance programs administered through State 
     and local voucher programs that receive reimbursement from 
     FEMA; or
       (B) any other program authorized under section 403 of the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5170b).
       (c) State and Local Governments.--FEMA shall work with 
     State and local governments, as well as private entities 
     providing services, to ensure that proper notice and 
     assistance is provided to individuals and households, while 
     the transfer under this section is completed.
       (d) Opt-Out Provision.--Individuals and families receiving 
     FEMA housing assistance under subsection (b) may opt-out of 
     the transfer to the Disaster Voucher Program authorized in 
     subsection (a).
       (e) Applicability.--This section shall apply with respect 
     to individuals and households affected--
       (1) by a disaster occurring on or after the date of 
     enactment of this Act; and
       (2) by the consequences of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and 
     Wilma of 2005.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Hagel, and 
        Mr. Nelson of Nebraska):
  S. 3890. A bill to enhance and improve the energy security of the 
United States, expand economic development, increase agricultural 
income, and improve environmental quality by reauthorizing and 
improving the renewable energy systems and energy efficiency 
improvements program of the Department of Agriculture through fiscal 
year 2012, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Rural Energy 
for America Act of 2006. This legislation will strengthen and expand 
the renewable energy and energy efficiency program established in 
section 9006 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 by 
increasing its overall funding, creating a new rebate) program, 
providing new grant options for wind energy projects, allowing rural 
schools to qualify for the program and fostering the administration of 
direct loans. I am very pleased to have Senators Lugar, Durbin, Hagel 
and Nelson as co-sponsors.
  The section 9006 Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency 
Improvements program--to be re-named under this legislation as the 
Rural Energy for America Program (REAP)--provides farmers, ranchers, 
and rural small businesses with financial support for installing 
renewable energy systems and making energy efficiency improvements.
  I authored section 9006 in 2002 as Chair of the Senate Committee on 
Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry with the strong support of Senator 
Lugar, the Ranking Member at that time and a long-time ally in 
advocating for renewable energy production. This has proven to be one 
of the most important provisions we included in the 2002 farm bill's 
first-ever energy title.
  During its first three years, the Renewable Energy Systems and Energy 
Efficiency Improvements program has distributed $63.9 million and 
catalyzed the development of 412 renewable energy and energy efficiency 
projects in 37 states. The awards have leveraged an additional $699 
million, bringing the total program-related investment in clean energy 
systems for farms, ranches and rural communities to $763 million. Thus, 
this program has had remarkable success in stimulating investments that 
increase reliance on clean, domestic energy systems and enhance energy 
efficiency in our agricultural and rural business sectors.
  Developing and expanding homegrown renewable energy is a key part of 
our national energy security strategy. Section 9006 provides grant 
support for many different forms of renewable energy, including solar, 
wind, biomass, geothermal and renewable hydrogen.
  Prior to 2003, there were fewer than 30 locally-owned wind farms in 
operation. As a direct result of the section 9006 program, over 80 new 
community wind projects were awarded grants by the end of 2005. When 
completed, these projects will have a capacity of over 300 megawatts of 
wind power and provide new income for American farmers and cleaner air 
for all of us.
  Section 9006 successfully promotes on-farm anaerobic digesters, which 
capture and use methane gas from livestock and poultry manure. Before 
2003, there were fewer than 10 digesters in operation in the United 
States. Under the section 9006 program, 15 new digester projects are 
now operational and an additional 59 projects are under development. 
These projects provide new sources of farm income and help farmers deal 
with manure in a more environmentally sound manner.
  The program also has funded bioenergy production and the adoption of 
energy efficiency technologies and practices. As a result, 124 million 
gallons of ethanol and biodiesel production capacity are coming online, 
and energy saving improvements have been installed at 160 farms, 
ranches and rural small businesses, resulting in a savings of 250 
billion BTUs/year and millions of dollars in reduced electricity, 
diesel fuel, natural gas and propane expense.
  Together, these renewable energy projects produce 16.9 trillion BTUs/
year in the form of fuels, electricity and thermal energy. The 
combination of renewable energy and energy efficiency projects also 
will reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere by 4 million 
metric tons a year, showing that our rural communities can be a part of 
the solution to global warming.
  It is clear that the section 9006 program has been extraordinarily 
successful. However, we have only begun to tap into the potential for 
American ingenuity in homegrown clean energy

[[Page 17736]]

production and energy efficiency measures. The demand for rural 
renewable energy and energy efficiency assistance far outpaces the 
program's resources. Today, the demand is almost triple the available 
program funding.
  Our legislation will strengthen and expand the program to help 
agricultural producers and rural small businesses cope with high energy 
prices, move our rural economies forward and protect the environment. 
In addition to increasing overall program funding, this bill will allow 
rural schools to apply for REAP funding. Schools have been eager to 
participate in the section 9006 program since its inception. Allowing 
schools to qualify will help them mitigate high energy costs and help 
teachers educate our youth about the many benefits of energy efficiency 
and clean alternative energy sources.
  This legislation further promotes wind energy expansion by giving 
farmers and other eligible developers an additional financing option. 
Currently, most of the funds granted for wind power projects under 
section 9006 are used to purchase and install wind turbine systems. 
Under Federal tax rules, however, grants used for such acquisition and 
construction costs have the potential to significantly reduce important 
tax credits for the project.
  To avoid such counterproductive tax impacts, the legislation 
authorizes USDA in appropriate circumstances to structure grants as 
production incentives instead of equipment purchase or construction 
grants, thereby reducing the risk of negating the tax credit benefit. 
The need for such a change was highlighted in a recent report written 
by Berkeley National Lab entitled ``Avoiding the Haircut: Potential 
Ways to Enhance the Value of the USDA's Section 9006 Program.''
  This legislation also includes a new rebate program providing the 
lesser of $10,000 or 50 percent of project costs for energy efficiency 
improvements and the purchase of renewable energy systems. Similar 
state-run rebate programs are recognized as effective mechanisms for 
promoting small-scale development projects. This rebate program will 
enable small and medium-sized farmers and rural small businesses to 
obtain rapid and long-lasting relief from high energy prices through a 
simple and proven mechanism. Grants for this purpose would be limited 
to no more than 20% of the total REAP funding.
  This bill also urges USDA to initiate the use of direct loans to 
complement the REAP program grants, by expressing the sense of the 
Senate that USDA should implement the direct loan provisions of section 
9006. Although the original legislation in section 9006 called for the 
establishment of a program of ``grants, loans and loan guarantees,'' 
USDA has not yet established a direct loan program. Our legislation 
urges USDA to move a direct loan initiative forward.
  The bill also allows USDA to provide grants for feasibility studies. 
Feasibility studies can ensure that projects are thoroughly assessed 
through technology and systems' analysis in their early stages, thus 
promoting successful and cost-effective projects. The amount of funds 
for feasibility studies would be capped to ensure that the majority of 
REAP funding continues to focus on deployment of renewable energy 
systems and energy efficiency improvements.
  Farm-based energy initiatives encompass a wide range of proven 
technologies to produce or save energy. The unique and successful 
section 9006 program has been instrumental to adoption of renewable 
energy and energy efficiency systems in the agricultural and rural 
small business sectors. The record to date signals an opportunity for 
vastly expanding these alternative energy and energy efficiency 
benefits in rural America.
  We have broad agreement in our country on moving farm-based renewable 
energy and energy efficiency forward. Let's help do that by updating 
and improving the section 9006--Rural Energy for America Program--for 
the future.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Lautenberg, and 
        Mr. Schumer):
  S. 3891. A bill to extend the time for filing certain claims under 
the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join with Senators 
Clinton, Lautenberg, and Schumer to introduce the James Zadroga Act. 
This bicameral and bipartisan legislation would reopen the September 11 
Victims Compensation Fund, VCF, to provide financial assistance to 
victims and first responders of the attacks of 
9/11 who became ill, in addition to their respective family members.
  James Zadroga was a New York Police Department, NYPD, detective and 
New Jersey resident, who when he died earlier this year was the first 
9/11 responder to have his death directly attributed to exposure to the 
toxins of Ground Zero. He became ill just weeks after working at Ground 
Zero, but because he retired in 2004, the NYPD determined that his 
four-year-old daughter Tylerann could only receive a disability 
pension, instead of the full death benefit to which she should be 
entitled.
  That is why in April, I authored a letter with my colleagues Senators 
Lautenberg, Clinton, and Schumer that called on New York officials to 
enact legislation that would provide full benefits to Tylerann and 
other beneficiaries like her.
  In August, New York enacted three new laws, including one that would 
allow those recovery workers who have retired from public service to 
have their retirement status reclassified as accidental disability if 
they later become ill due to their efforts at Ground Zero. That action 
by the State of New York is vitally important, because we unfortunately 
know that Detective Zadroga's death will not be the last to be suffered 
by the brave Americans who rushed to Ground Zero in the hours and days 
after September 11.
  As our Nation continues to heal from the wounds inflicted by the 9/11 
terror attacks, there are many first responders whose wounds have yet 
to heal from the aftermath of that day. We as a nation must care for 
those who cared for America in its time of need. We cannot let 
bureaucratic red tape stand between those who helped America pick up 
the pieces and the compensation they deserve.
  Today, by introducing this legislation we take the next step in 
working to ensure that the heroes who sacrificed their health--and in 
Detective Zadroga's case, his life--will be justly compensated. I 
believe we owe them nothing less.
  This legislation reopens the fund created to care for the families of 
9/11 victims and for those injured or who became ill as a direct result 
of the attacks. Unfortunately, many who should have received 
compensation from the VCF never did because their illnesses did not 
develop or have become significantly worse since the original filing 
deadline of December 22, 2003. In other instances, original guidelines 
prohibited the VCF to make awards if injuries were sustained more than 
96 hours after the attacks.
  Specifically, the ``James Zadroga Act'' would: Reopen September 11 
Victims Compensation Fund for individuals who became ill or did not 
file before the original December 22, 2003 deadline;
  Allow for adjustment of previous awards if the Special Master of the 
fund determines the medical conditions of the claimant warrants an 
adjustment; and
  Amend eligibility rules so that responders to the 9/11 attacks who 
arrived later than the first 96 hours could be eligible if they 
experienced illness or injury from their work at the site.
  Congress needs to pass this bill--we need to stand up for these 
American heroes and their families. I urge my colleagues to join with 
us in this important effort by cosponsoring this piece of legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

[[Page 17737]]



                                S. 3891

       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 ``James Zadroga Act of 2006''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 was 
     established to provide compensation to individuals (or 
     relatives of deceased individuals) who were physically 
     injured or killed as a result of the terrorist-related 
     aircraft crashes of September 11, 2001.
       (2) The deadline for filing claims for compensation under 
     the Victim Compensation Fund was December 22, 2003.
       (3) Some individuals did not know they were eligible to 
     file claims for compensation or did not know they had 
     suffered physical harm as a result of the terrorist-related 
     aircraft crashes until after the December 22, 2003, deadline.

     SEC. 3. DEADLINE EXTENSION FOR CERTAIN CLAIMS UNDER SEPTEMBER 
                   11TH VICTIM COMPENSATION FUND OF 2001.

       Section 405(a)(3) of the Air Transportation Safety and 
     System Stabilization Act (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(3) Limitation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided by subparagraph (B), 
     no claim may be filed under paragraph (1) after December 22, 
     2003.
       ``(B) Exceptions.--A claim may be filed under paragraph (1) 
     by an individual (or by a personal representative on behalf 
     of a deceased individual)--
       ``(i) during the 5-year period after the date of enactment 
     of this subparagraph, if the Special Master determines that 
     the individual--

       ``(I) did not know that the individual had suffered 
     physical harm as a result of the terrorist-related aircraft 
     crashes of September 11, 2001, until after December 22, 2003, 
     and before the date of the enactment of this subparagraph;
       ``(II) did not for any reason other than as described in 
     subclause (I) know that the individual was eligible to file a 
     claim under paragraph (1) until after December 22, 2003;
       ``(III) suffered psychological harm as a result of the 
     terrorist-related aircraft crashes; or
       ``(IV) in the case of an individual who had previously 
     filed a claim under this title, suffered a significantly 
     greater physical harm than was known to the individual as of 
     the date the claim was filed and did not know the full extent 
     of the physical harm suffered as a result of the terrorist-
     related aircraft crashes until after the date on which the 
     claim was filed and before the date of enactment of this 
     subparagraph; and

       ``(ii) during the 5-year period after the date that the 
     individual--

       ``(I) first knew that the individual had suffered physical 
     or psychological harm as a result of the terrorist-related 
     aircraft crashes of September 11, 2001, if the Special Master 
     determines that the individual did not know that the 
     individual had suffered such physical or psychological harm 
     until a date that is on or after the date of enactment of 
     this subparagraph; or
       ``(II) in the case of an individual who had previously 
     filed a claim under this title and had suffered a 
     significantly greater physical harm than was known to the 
     individual as of the date the claim was filed, or had 
     suffered psychological harm as a result of the terrorist-
     related crashes, first knew the full extent of the physical 
     and psychological harm suffered as a result of the terrorist-
     related aircraft crashes, if the Special Master determines 
     that the individual did not know the full extent of the harm 
     suffered until a date that is on or after the date of the 
     enactment of this subparagraph.''.

     SEC. 4. EXCEPTION TO SINGLE CLAIM REQUIREMENT IN CERTAIN 
                   CIRCUMSTANCES.

       Section 405(c)(3)(A) of the Air Transportation Safety and 
     System Stabilization Act (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(A) Single claim.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided by clause (ii), not 
     more than 1 claim may be submitted under this title by an 
     individual or on behalf of a deceased individual.
       ``(ii) Exception.--A second claim may be filed under 
     subsection (a)(1) by an individual (or by a personal 
     representative on behalf of a deceased individual) if the 
     individual is an individual described in either of clauses 
     (i)(IV) or (ii)(II) of subsection (a)(3)(B).''.

     SEC. 5. ELIGIBILITY OF CLAIMANTS SUFFERING FROM PSYCHOLOGICAL 
                   HARM.

       (a) In General.--Section 405(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the Air 
     Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (49 U.S.C. 
     40101 note) is amended by inserting ``, psychological harm,'' 
     before ``or death''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 405(a)(2)(B)(i) of such 
     Act is amended by striking ``physical harm'' and inserting 
     ``physical or psychological harm''.

     SEC. 6. IMMEDIATE AFTERMATH DEFINED.

       Section 402 of the Air Transportation Safety and System 
     Stabilization Act (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(11) Immediate aftermath.--In section 405(c)(2)(A)(i), 
     the term `immediate aftermath' means any period of time after 
     the terrorist-related aircraft crashes of September 11, 2001, 
     as determined by the Special Master, that was sufficiently 
     close in time to the crashes that there was a demonstrable 
     risk to the claimant of physical or psychological harm 
     resulting from the crashes, including the period of time 
     during which rescue, recovery, and cleanup activities 
     relating to the crashes were conducted.''.

                          ____________________