[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3427-3432]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. SANTORUM:
  S. 2408. A bill to require the Director of National Intelligence to 
release documents captured in Afghanistan or Iraq during Operation 
Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi Freedom; 
to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to offer remarks on 
legislation that I am introducing today here in the Senate.
  This legislation concerns the need to release military documents and 
photographs recovered in Iraq and Afghanistan. Specifically, the bill 
requires the Director of National Intelligence to make publicly 
available on an Internet website documents captured in Afghanistan or 
Iraq during Operation Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, or 
Operation Iraqi Freedom.
  In my conversations with President Bush and Secretary of Defense 
Rumsfeld, I urged that efforts to examine these documents and 
photographs be accelerated. With U.S. and Coalition forces actively 
engaged in Iraq, the analysis and release of these documents should be 
made a top priority within the Department of Defense.
  Recently, I gave a speech at the Valley Forge Military Academy in 
Pennsylvania concerning ongoing military operations in Iraq and 
detailed why we must prevail. In my speech, I noted that U.S. and 
Coalition forces are fighting the forces of Islamic fascism and those 
who seek to overthrow the values and beliefs that civilized nations 
cherish. In short, this is a battle we cannot afford to lose.
  By way of background, The Weekly Standard published several articles 
detailing a number of these documents and the information contained 
within them which ``connect the dots'' between Saddam Hussein and the 
training of Islamic terrorists. Among the points highlighted in a 
recent The Weekly Standard article:

       The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come 
     from a collection of

[[Page 3428]]

     some 2 million ``exploitable items'' captured in postwar Iraq 
     and Afghanistan. They include handwritten notes, typed 
     documents, audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs, floppy 
     discs, and computer hard drives . . . Nearly three years 
     after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, only 50,000 of these 2 
     million ``exploitable items'' have been thoroughly examined.

  Many of the translated and analyzed documents were entered into a 
government database known as ``HARMONY.'' It is now 4 years since these 
documents were captured. I understand that previous requests to release 
information from the HARMONY database have been rejected or delayed. It 
is reasonable to assume that over the course of the last 4 years any 
actionable intelligence contained within these documents has already 
been exploited.
  It is imperative that documents captured in Iraq which highlight the 
connections between Saddam Hussein's brutal regime and Islamic 
terrorists be released as soon as possible. These documents are 
increasingly necessary to help the American people understand both the 
reasons for our involvement in Iraq and the challenge of defending 
freedom and democracy.
  However, in the interest of national security, the bill permits the 
Director of National Intelligence to withhold making a document 
publicly available--provided he informs the relevant congressional 
committees of the justification for not disclosing the document.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Nelson 
        of Florida, and Mrs. Lincoln):
  S. 2409. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
reduce cost-sharing under part D of such title for certain non-
institutionalized full-benefit dual eligible individuals; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, today I am proud to join with my 
colleagues, Senators Bingaman, Clinton and Nelson, to introduce the 
Home and Community Based Services Copayment Equity Act of 2006. This 
important piece of legislation addresses a significant oversight in the 
Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit. While nearly 22 million 
seniors now have access to affordable prescription drug coverage under 
the program, many of the most vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries are 
being charged unnecessary copayments simply based upon how they choose 
to receive their long-term care services.
  Under current law, dual eligible Medicare beneficiaries, those who 
qualify for both Medicaid and Medicare coverage, receive a subsidy from 
the government to pay the benefit's required $250 deductible. These 
individuals also qualify for reduced copayments for both generic and 
brand named drugs in the amount of one and three dollars respectively. 
If a dual-eligible beneficiary receives long-term care services in an 
institutional setting, such as a nursing home, he or she is exempt from 
paying the required copayment. Congress decided to provide this 
assistance because dual-eligible beneficiaries residing in nursing 
homes live off of very limited incomes. For instance, in Oregon the 
personal needs allowance beneficiaries receive each month for 
incidentals, including medications, is only $30. As many 
institutionalized beneficiaries are on multiple medications, they would 
not be able to meet their share of drug costs.
  This is the very reason Congress provided institutionalized dual-
eligible beneficiaries with an exemption from all copayments under 
Medicare Part D. However, many dual eligible beneficiaries choose to 
receive long-term care services in home or community-based settings, 
such as assisted living or resident care program facilities. Almost all 
states have chosen to establish Home and Community Based Services 
Medicaid demonstration projects that have expanded access to community 
based alternatives to an even greater number of low-income elderly 
Americans. The State of Oregon operates one of the Nation's most 
successful HCS waivers, serving approximately 23,500 dual eligible 
beneficiaries this year. My State has a thriving community based care 
industry that has provided many dual eligible Oregonians the freedom to 
choose the care setting that best meets their own physical and social 
needs.
  While dual eligible beneficiaries are exempted from prescription drug 
copayments under Medicare Part D, those choosing community based 
alternatives are required to pay them. This is despite the fact that 
beneficiaries choosing community based care options typically live off 
of the same limited incomes as those residing in nursing homes. Despite 
the fact that some States provide HCS beneficiaries a larger personal 
stipend each month, they may have greater financial demands. At the end 
of the day, they are in no better position to pay the costs of 
prescription drugs than those beneficiaries living in nursing homes.
  I should also note that their less restrictive living environments 
may require them to take additional medications to support their daily 
routines. It is not uncommon for dual eligible beneficiaries in 
community-based care settings to be on 8 to 10 medications at a given 
time. At that level, even minimal copayments create a significant 
financial burden to these individuals.
  The current dual-eligible copayment exemption policy is not only 
creating inequity in Medicare Part D, it is potentially restricting 
access to life-saving medications. This is certainly not what Congress 
intended when it created the new prescription drug benefit, especially 
for this incredibly vulnerable population. If Congress does not act 
quickly to extend the exemption to dual eligible beneficiaries in 
community based care, individuals may begin to gravitate toward 
institutional options simply because they can have their drugs costs 
paid in those settings. I believe we need to do everything possible to 
support choice in long-term care, and by applying the current 
institutional copayment exemption more uniformly, Congress will ensure 
the Medicare drug benefit does not adversely affect beneficiaries 
choices.
  I ask my colleagues to improve the fairness of the Medicare 
prescription drug benefit for all dual eligible beneficiaries by 
supporting the Home and Community Based Copayment Equity Act. I hope 
you will join me in calling for its quick passage in the Senate.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce bipartisan 
legislation with my colleagues Senators Smith, Nelson, and Bingaman to 
address yet another serious flaw in the Medicare prescription drug 
benefit that has come to light.
  On January 1, the new Medicare prescription drug benefit went into 
effect. Overnight, millions of seniors and disabled Americans found 
themselves thrown into a confusing and complex transition.
  Some of our poorest and most vulnerable beneficiaries, those in 
assisted living facilities, have found themselves suddenly forced to 
produce co-payments to get the medications they need.
  These are beneficiaries with serious mental illnesses who have been 
stabilized on medications, and people with developmental and physical 
disabilities who have little or no incomes and no way to afford the 
medicines that they depend on.
  The bill we are introducing will fix this problem by waiving co-
payments for this group of vulnerable beneficiaries in the same manner 
that these co-payments are already waived for Medicare beneficiaries in 
nursing homes.
  This is just one of so many problems we have seen plaguing this 
program. I am working on all fronts to help Medicare beneficiaries 
weather this transition. Before this program went into effect, it was 
clear that those dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, our poorest 
and most vulnerable seniors and disabled, would have a particular 
challenge navigating this transition. I was very concerned that many of 
these Medicare recipients would walk up to their pharmacy counters on 
January 1 and be unable to get their prescriptions filled.
  In anticipation of these problems, I introduced legislation in 
December to keep these Medicare recipients from falling through the 
cracks by stepping up outreach and education to pharmacists and 
providing reimbursement to pharmacists who are charged a

[[Page 3429]]

transaction fee to access beneficiary information through Medicare. I 
also co-sponsored legislation to give Medicare beneficiaries more time 
to enroll in the new program.
  And I issued a resource guide, now available in both English and 
Spanish, to help New Yorkers navigate this new program. To date more 
than 75,000 copies of the guide have been distributed.
  Since the new program went into effect, I have repeatedly urged the 
Bush Administration to address the problems plaguing this program. And 
in January, I introduced comprehensive legislation along with several 
of my Senate colleagues, that includes my bill to help pharmacists help 
their customers, and makes the other fixes I have been calling for: 
provisions to improve outreach and education, fix problems with drug 
plans transition programs, protect the benefits of seniors who also 
have coverage from a retiree drug plan, and make sure that states and 
low income beneficiaries are reimbursed for excessive costs they have 
been forced to shoulder by the inept implementation of the new benefit.
  We owe it to our seniors and disabled Americans to get this right. 
And I will keep fighting to ensure that we do.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my 
colleagues Senators Smith, Bingaman and Clinton as we introduce the 
Home and Community Services Co-payment Equity Act of 2006.
  For years now, I have advocated providing seniors and the disabled 
with meaningful prescription drug coverage. No one in this country 
should ever have to choose between their meals and their medications. 
In 2003, Congress passed the Medicare Modernization Act, which created 
a Medicare prescription drug program. I did not support this 
legislation, because I believe it created a program that contains 
several major flaws. However, I think that our job now is to do our 
best to help beneficiaries by fixing the underlying law.
  The Medicare prescription drug program exempts the lowest income 
nursing home residents from all prescription drug co-payments. However, 
it leaves out the equally vulnerable group of low-income beneficiaries 
who live in assisted living and other home and community-based 
facilities. These are often beneficiaries with serious mental illnesses 
who have been stabilized on medications, and people with developmental 
and physical disabilities who have little or no incomes and previously 
received prescription drug coverage under Medicaid.
  In my home State of Florida, thousands of individuals with mental 
illnesses are integrated into community-based programs such as 
assisted-living facilities. Unfortunately, many patients in these 
facilities are forgoing their medications on account of the new 
Medicare co-payments. Reports also indicate that patients have been 
hospitalized because they have been unable to afford their essential 
medications due to the new cost-sharing requirements.
  In response, we are introducing the Home and Community Services Co-
payment Equity Act of 2006. The legislation would waive co-payments for 
low-income beneficiaries residing in assisted living and other home- 
and community-based facilities. This bill is a small step that will go 
a long way towards ensuring that low-income patients get their 
prescription drugs.
  This issue boils down to just one goal--helping low-income seniors 
and people with disabilities afford the medications they need. I urge 
all of our colleagues, from both sides of the aisle, to join us in this 
vital effort.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. COLEMAN (for himself, Mr. Levin, and Mr. Graham):
  S. 2410. A bill to amend the Homeland-Security Act of 2002 to limit 
foreign control of investments in certain United States critical 
infrastructure; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill which I am introducing today, the Foreign Investment 
Transparency and Security Act of 2006, 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. 2410

       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 ``Foreign Investment 
     Transparency and Security Act of 2006''.

     SEC. 2. LIMITS ON FOREIGN CONTROL OF INVESTMENTS IN CERTAIN 
                   UNITED STATES CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

       (a) In General.--Title II of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

   ``Subtitle E--Limits on Foreign Control of Investments in Certain 
                 United States Critical Infrastructure

     ``SEC. 241. DEFINITIONS.

       ``As used in this subtitle--
       ``(1) the term `foreign government controlled entity' means 
     any entity in which a foreign government owns a majority 
     interest, or otherwise controls or manages the entity; and
       ``(2) the term `general business corporation' means any 
     entity that qualifies for treatment for Federal taxation 
     purposes under subchapter C or subchapter S of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986, established or organized under the laws 
     of any State.

     ``SEC. 242. LIMITATION ON FOREIGN INVESTMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--A foreign government controlled entity 
     may acquire, own, or otherwise control or manage any critical 
     infrastructure of the United States only through the 
     establishment or operation of a foreign owned general 
     business corporation that meets the requirements of 
     subsection (b).
       ``(b) Requirements.--For purposes of this section, a 
     general business corporation shall--
       ``(1) have a board of directors, the majority of which is 
     comprised of United States citizens;
       ``(2) have a chief security officer who is a United States 
     citizen, responsible for safety and security issues related 
     to the critical infrastructure; and
       ``(3) maintain all records related to operations, 
     personnel, and security of the United States general business 
     corporation in the United States.
       ``(c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this subtitle may 
     be construed to restrict or otherwise alter the authority of 
     the President or the Committee on Foreign Investment in the 
     United States (or any successor thereto) as the designee of 
     the President, under section 721 of the Defense Production 
     Act of 1950.

     ``SEC. 243. REGULATIONS REQUIRED.

       ``Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of 
     this subtitle, the Secretary, in coordination with the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, shall promulgate final regulations 
     to carry out this subtitle.

     ``SEC. 244. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       ``(a) In General.--Section 242 shall apply beginning on the 
     date that is 6 months after the date of enactment of this 
     subtitle.
       ``(b) Existing Entities.--A foreign government controlled 
     entity that owns or otherwise controls or manages any 
     critical infrastructure of the United States on the effective 
     date of this subtitle shall comply with the requirements of 
     this subtitle not later than 180 days after that effective 
     date.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents under 
     section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     101) is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 237 the following:

   ``Subtitle E--Limits on Foreign Control of Investments in Certain 
                 United States Critical Infrastructure

``Sec. 241. Definitions.
``Sec. 242. Limitation on foreign investments.
``Sec. 243. Regulations required.
``Sec. 244. Effective date.''.

     SEC. 3. MARITIME SECURITY.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) existing scanning processes for maritime containers are 
     insufficient;
       (2) it should be the goal of the United States to scan 100 
     percent of inbound maritime containers; and
       (3) the maritime container inspection system employed in 
     Hong Kong shows promise in enhancing the maritime security 
     capabilities of the United States.
       (b) Amendments to Homeland Security Act.--
       (1) In general.--Subtitle A of title IV of the Homeland 
     Security Act (6 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

     ``SEC. 404. REPORT ON SCANNING OF MARITIME CONTAINERS.

       ``(a) Report to Congress.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit 
     a report to Congress detailing the processes and policies for 
     implementation of a scanning system for 100 percent of the 
     inbound maritime containers described in subsection (a).
       ``(b) Definition of Container.--The term `container' has 
     the meaning given the term in the International Convention 
     for Safe

[[Page 3430]]

     Containers, with annexes, done at Geneva December 2, 1972 (29 
     UST 3707).''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents under 
     section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     101) is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 403 the following:
``Sec. 404. Report on scanning of maritime containers.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BIDEN:
  S. 2412. A bill to address homeland security issues relating to first 
responders, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the use of technology, 
Federal, State, and local coordination, and critical infrastructure, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the 9/11 Commission 
Recommendations Implementation Act of 2006. This legislation will 
provide $41.625 billion over the next 10 years to help ensure that we 
implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
  Back in July of 2004, the 9/11 Commission--with distinguished 
bipartisan leadership from former Republican Governor Tom Kean and 
former Congressman Lee Hamilton--issued its report with recommendations 
of what the government should do to help better protect the Nation.
  Nearly a year and a half later, they issued a so-called report card 
to tell us how well the government had been doing at implementing their 
recommendations.
  Well, it doesn't look good. That report card was riddled with Cs, Ds, 
Fs, and incompletes.
  Most Americans believe that we've taken the obvious steps to close 
the gaps in our homeland defense. They believe that at the very least, 
we have a plan, that we've set priorities, and that we know what the 
next steps are.
  But, let me quote from the Commission's report card from December on 
what we've done to assess the risks and vulnerabilities of our critical 
infrastructure--transportation, communications, and industrial assets.
  Here's what they say--and I quote--``no risk and vulnerability 
assessments have actually been made. No national priorities are yet 
established. No recommendations have been made on the allocation of 
scarce resources. All key decisions on homeland security are at least a 
year away.''
  We all remember 9/11, when we learned for the first time that local 
police, fire, and rescue units could not communicate with each other 
and could not communicate with Federal agencies. We saw how this 
inability probably resulted in many deaths that could have been 
prevented. Well, we learned during Hurricane Katrina that things are no 
better today. No better today.
  The one place I think most Americans think we've probably done pretty 
well--passenger screening--actually got an ``F.'' The 9/11 commission 
reports stated that, in fact, ``few improvements have been made to the 
existing passenger screening system since right after 9/11.'' With 
respect to checked bag and cargo screening for commercial flights, the 
9/11 Commission gave a score of ``D'', stating that ``improvements have 
not been made a priority by Congress or the Bush Administration.''
  This is unacceptable. This Administration hasn't even filled in the 
very obvious gaps in our homeland defense. We haven't done it. We 
simply haven't done it.
  The bill that I am introducing today will ensure that we address the 
most obvious gaps in our homeland defense. It begins with those areas 
where the Commission graded us and the President as ``F'' and ``D.'' 
And, it addresses those areas that were outside the scope of the report 
but are commonsense things that we should be doing, such as securing 
the rails and providing funding for local law enforcement.
  And it's pretty basic. We have done nothing much to deal with the 
problems most Americans know relate to homeland security. We are safer 
but not nearly safe enough. The bipartisan commission that got great 
grades from everybody in the Nation felt compelled on their own dime, 
their own money, their own resources, not funded by the government, to 
continue to issue reports and to hold hearings. And they issued a 
report on December 5 that is, quite frankly, embarrassing and 
dangerous.
  We can and we have to marshal all our country's resources in this 
struggle. Do you think that the American people would rather us spend 
this money on securing our ports, our chemical plants, our railroads, 
our cities, or give it back as a tax break for the wealthiest 
Americans? Given the choice, the American people said, let's make our 
streets safer. I'm confident they think we should make the country 
safer. This legislation will help take us down that path, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 2413. A bill to establish the Return of Talent Program to allow 
aliens who are legally present in the United States to return 
temporarily to the country of citizenship of the alien if that country 
is engaged in post-conflict or natural disaster reconstruction, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, two of the greatest challenges we face 
today are how to address the needs of post-conflict countries, and 
countries that are suffering from large-scale natural disasters. These 
are critical issues, and ones that we cannot afford to get wrong--for 
the sake of the people living in those nations, and for the sake of our 
own security.
  On the post-conflict front, a 2004 commission organized by the Center 
for Strategic and International Studies and the Association of the U.S. 
Army found, to no one's surprise, that ``failed states matter--for 
national security as well as for humanitarian reasons. If left to their 
own devices, such states can become sanctuaries for terrorist networks, 
organized crime and drug traffickers, as well as posing grave 
humanitarian challenges and threats to regional stability.''
  The most obvious case in point is the reconstruction of Iraq. I've 
spent many hours on this floor, for three years, making clear that we 
have to get it right in Iraq. And in addition to Iraq, unfortunately, 
we can talk about many other states that are either unstable, or are 
tenuously recovering from past conflicts including Liberia, 
Afghanistan, East Timor, Kosovo, Haiti, and the Democratic Republic of 
Congo.
  Earthquakes, floods, drought and landslides often have the most dire 
impacts in developing countries that are the least equipped to respond. 
The countries ravaged by the 2004 tsunami are on a path to recovery, 
but there is still a long way to go: Indonesia lost over 150,000 
people, with half a million left homeless. In India, almost 20,000 
people lost their lives and 2.79 million people were affected, losing 
homes, land, and livestock. The tsunami set back the Maldives twenty 
years in development, eviscerating the country's economic backbone and 
tourism industry.
  Recent years also saw devastating natural disasters in other parts of 
the world. Earthquakes in Iran affected more than 30,000 people. 
Catastrophic floods in Bangladesh left thousands dead and hundreds of 
thousands homeless. Recurring droughts in Afghanistan left over 130,000 
people--some 92 percent of the population--in need of food or aid.
  We need comprehensive--and creative--strategies to address the need 
to rebuild in countries on the rebound from conflicts or natural 
disasters. One such strategy is to tap into the store of human as well 
as financial resources here in the United States. We should allow, and 
indeed encourage, immigrants to use their skills, talents, and 
knowledge to help rebuild their native lands. In fact, the diaspora 
presents one of the best collective resources that exists: these 
individuals know the communities. They know the culture. They know the 
language--more than any contractors and more than any humanitarian 
workers from the outside, no matter how well trained or how much 
expertise they may have.
  So today, I am introducing legislation that would create a ``Return 
of Talent'' visa program.

[[Page 3431]]

  The idea is simple: a Return of Talent program would allow legal 
immigrants in the United States to return home to help with 
reconstruction efforts. ``Legal Permanent Residents'' will be able to 
return temporarily to their countries after a conflict or a significant 
natural disaster to help rebuild, without their time out of the United 
States affecting their ability to meet the requirements for U.S. 
citizenship.
  Under current law, a Legal Permanent Resident who wants to apply for 
U.S. citizenship is required to be physically present in the United 
States for at least half of the five years immediately preceding the 
date of filing the naturalization application.
  This residency requirement could be particularly difficult to meet 
for those who may have family and friends in their country of origin 
who are in desperate need of help. We should not stand in their way of 
returning, allowing them to bring their talent and expertise home, 
helping them help others at a time of greatest need.
  Press articles have highlighted stories of such individuals--
engineers, bankers, teachers and translators--who are willing to 
contribute to reconstruction efforts. They simply cannot do so without 
jeopardizing their immigration status.
  This legislation would encourage those skilled and committed 
individuals to return to their countries of origin to revive the 
business, industry, agriculture, education, health and other sectors 
that have been weakened or destroyed after years of conflict or 
devastating disasters.
  The Return of Talent program would include any individual who 
demonstrates an ability and willingness to make a material contribution 
to the post-conflict or natural disaster reconstruction in their 
country of origin.
  The program would apply to immigrants from countries where U.S. armed 
forces have engaged in armed conflict or peacekeeping, or countries 
where the United Nations Security Council has authorized peacekeeping 
operations in the past ten years. Immigrants from countries which 
received funding from the U.S. Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance 
also would be eligible to participate in the program.
  Estimates of individuals who could participate in this program are 
relatively low. For example, the United States admitted 2,137 Afghani 
and 3,494 Iraqi immigrants in 2004 who are now Legal Permanent 
Residents eligible to pursue U.S. citizenship. Immigrants from 
Indonesia numbered 2,418 and Bangladesh, 8,061 in the same year. Yet, 
while the program would have a small impact on the U.S. naturalization 
process, the contributions of even a few hundred individuals could have 
a tremendous positive effect on reconstruction work.
  In simple terms, a Return of Talent program makes sense. Everybody 
wins: The United States is able to support badly needed rebuilding 
efforts without increasing foreign aid; immigrants are able to use 
their skills and resources to help communities without jeopardizing 
their immigration status; and the people recovering from conflict and 
disaster receive much-needed assistance.
  A Return of Talent program is an important piece of our overall 
strategy to stabilize and rebuild countries torn by conflict and 
devastated by natural disaster. I urge my colleagues to support this 
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:

                                S. 2413

       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 ``Return of Talent Act''.

     SEC. 2. RETURN OF TALENT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) is amended by 
     inserting after section 317 the following:


 ``TEMPORARY ABSENCE OF PERSONS PARTICIPATING IN THE RETURN OF TALENT 
                                PROGRAM

       ``Sec. 317A. (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall 
     establish the Return of Talent Program to permit eligible 
     aliens to temporarily return to the alien's country of 
     citizenship in order to make a material contribution to that 
     country if the country is engaged in post-conflict or natural 
     disaster reconstruction activities, for a period not 
     exceeding 24 months, unless an exception is granted under 
     subsection (d).
       ``(b) Eligible Alien.--An alien is eligible to participate 
     in the Return of Talent Program established under subsection 
     (a) if the alien meets the special immigrant description 
     under section 101(a)(27)(N).
       ``(c) Family Members.--The spouse, parents, siblings, and 
     any minor children of an alien who participates in the Return 
     of Talent Program established under subsection (a) may return 
     to such alien's country of citizenship with the alien and 
     reenter the United States with the alien.
       ``(d) Extension of Time.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security may extend the 24-month period referred to in 
     subsection (a) upon a showing that circumstances warrant that 
     an extension is necessary for post-conflict or natural 
     disaster reconstruction efforts.
       ``(e) Residency Requirements.--An immigrant described in 
     section 101(a)(27)(N) who participates in the Return of 
     Talent Program established under subsection (a), and the 
     spouse, parents, siblings, and any minor children who 
     accompany such immigrant to that immigrant's country of 
     citizenship, shall be considered, during such period of 
     participation in the program--
       ``(1) for purposes of section 316(a), physically present 
     and residing in the United States for purposes of 
     naturalization within the meaning of that section; and
       ``(2) for purposes of section 316(b), to meet the 
     continuous residency requirements in that section.
       ``(f) Oversight and Enforcement.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall 
     oversee and enforce the requirements of this section.''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 317 
     the following:

``317A. Temporary absence of persons participating in the Return of 
              Talent Program''.

     SEC. 3. ELIGIBLE IMMIGRANTS.

       Section 101(a)(27) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (L), by inserting a semicolon after 
     ``Improvement Act of 1998'';
       (2) in subparagraph (M), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(N) an immigrant who--
       ``(i) has been lawfully admitted to the United States for 
     permanent residence;
       ``(ii) demonstrates an ability and willingness to make a 
     material contribution to the post-conflict or natural 
     disaster reconstruction in the alien's country of 
     citizenship; and
       ``(iii) as determined by the Secretary of State in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security--
       ``(I) is a citizen of a country in which Armed Forces of 
     the United States are engaged, or have engaged in the 10 
     years preceding such determination, in combat or peacekeeping 
     operations;
       ``(II) is a citizen of a country where authorization for 
     United Nations peacekeeping operations was initiated by the 
     United Nations Security Council during the 10 years preceding 
     such determination; or
       ``(III) is a citizen of a country which received, during 
     the preceding 2 years, funding from the Office of Foreign 
     Disaster Assistance of the United States Agency for 
     International Development in response to a declared disaster 
     in such country by the United States Ambassador, the Chief of 
     the U.S. Mission, or the appropriate Assistant Secretary of 
     State, that is beyond the ability of such country's response 
     capacity and warrants a response by the United States 
     Government.''.

     SEC. 4. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with 
     the Secretary of State, shall submit a report to Congress 
     that describes--
       (1) the countries of citizenship of the participants in the 
     Return of Talent Program established under section 2;
       (2) the post-conflict or natural disaster reconstruction 
     efforts that benefitted, or were made possible, through 
     participation in the program; and
       (3) any other information that the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security determines to be appropriate.

     SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.

       Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall promulgate 
     regulations to carry out this Act and the amendments made by 
     this Act.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Bureau of 
     Citizenship and Immigration Services for fiscal year 2007, 
     such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act and the 
     amendments made by this Act.

[[Page 3432]]


                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAYH (for himself, Mr. Obama, Mr. Carper, and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 2414. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require 
broker reporting of customer's basis in securities transactions, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of a bill I am 
proud to introduce today with Senators Bayh, Kerry, and Carper to help 
close the tax gap by improving the reporting of capital gains income. 
This bill requires brokerage firms and mutual fund companies to track 
and report the adjusted cost basis of their clients' stock, bond, and 
mutual fund investments.
  This bill is a simple, commonsense solution to a serious problem. 
Many taxpayers have a hard enough time filing their taxes. One of the 
most complex parts of an individual's tax return is the schedule for 
capital gains income. And what makes capital gains particularly 
difficult is the challenge of figuring out the adjusted basis of a 
security that has been sold.
  Many taxpayers do not have the proper records or they don't know how 
to calculate adjusted basis for a stock that has split or been 
exchanged as part of a company's merger or acquisition. And right now, 
the IRS does not have the ability to monitor the accuracy of taxpayer 
calculations. As a result, there is a risk of error or fraud. In some 
cases, taxpayers may end up paying too much in taxes. More often, they 
report too little income and pay too little in taxes.
  In 2001, the IRS estimated that underreporting cost the Treasury $11 
billion annually. Today the loss is even greater.
  Because the IRS fails to collect these funds, the taxes that the rest 
of us have to pay are greater than they should be. Most people pay 
their taxes honestly and follow the law to the best of their ability. 
But a small number of tax frauds--who often owe great amounts of 
taxes--cheat the system. And it's hard now for the IRS to stop them.
  This bill makes it easier to stop them and it helps reduce the amount 
of Federal tax dollars that the IRS fails to collect each year. 
Brokerage firms and mutual fund companies will be required to keep 
track of a taxpayer's cost basis and to report that information to the 
IRS. This will make it easier for honest taxpayers to calculate their 
taxable capital gain, and harder for dishonest ones to lie about it. 
Based on information from the Taxpayer Advocate, reporting to the IRS 
can improve compliance of capital gains reporting from an estimated 50 
percent today to 90 percent.
  Fortunately, this new reporting requirement will not pose an undue 
burden to the financial firms affected. First, the firms will have 
plenty of time to put the necessary systems in place since the 
reporting requirement will not take effect until 2009, and then will 
only apply to securities acquired starting in 2008. Second, technology 
has made tracking by financial firms simple and efficient. More than 80 
percent of all retail accounts already subscribe to a national 
reporting service for transferring basis information at a nominal cost 
per account. Finally, in cases where it is impossible to track basis, 
the Treasury Secretary may develop regulations to require alternative 
information.
  It is estimated that $345 billion of Federal taxes goes uncollected 
each year. This bill doesn't solve that full problem, but it is a step 
in the right direction. It reduces the Federal deficit without raising 
taxes or cutting spending. It simplifies the tax filing process and 
reduces the chance of error or fraud. It applies what we know about the 
benefits of automatic reporting to the IRS--which is required now for 
wage income--to capital gains income as well.
  This bill makes sense. It's good policy. I urge my colleagues to join 
me in supporting it and to helping to improve our tax code.

                          ____________________