[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 10350-10354]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 3457. A bill to provide a national franchise and other regulatory 
relief to video service providers who offer a-la-carte programming for 
cable television, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation. 
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Consumers 
Having Options in Cable Entertainment, CHOICE, Act of 2006. This bill 
would encourage broadcasters and cable companies that own cable 
channels to sell their channels individually to subscribers. It would 
also promote cable programming distribution over the Internet.
  For almost 10 years I have supported giving consumers the ability to 
buy cable channels individually, also known as a la carte, to provide 
consumers with more control over the viewing options in their home and 
their monthly cable bill. Cable companies have resisted this and have 
continued to give consumers all the ``choice'' of a North Korean 
election ballot. There is only one option available: buy a package of 
channels, whether you watch all the channels or not. The alternative is 
to not receive cable programming at all. Why have cable companies and 
cable programmers refused to give consumers the ability to buy and pay 
for only those channels consumers watch? Simply because they do not 
have to. They are the only game in town. But not for long, I hope.
  Telephone companies have realized that consumers want more and are 
poised to provide consumers across the nation with an alternative to 
the local cable company. Many of these telephone companies, including 
AT&T, are also ready to offer consumers the ability to purchase 
channels a la carte. Such companies will offer two crucial benefits to 
consumers: more competition in the video service provider market, and 
more options for programming packages. Together, these two offerings 
will allow consumers to have greater control over the content that 
enters the home and the ability to manage their monthly cable bills.
  According to a Government Accountability Office, GAO, report, in 
communities where there are two cable companies competing for 
customers, cable rates are 15 percent less than in communities without 
any competition. A subsequent GAO study suggests that in some markets 
the presence of another cable competitor may reduce rates by an 
astounding 41 percent. Unfortunately, today less than 5 percent of 
communities have two companies competing to provide consumers cable 
television service.
  The CHOICE Act would help bring competition to the cable television 
market. Choice in cable television delivery is long overdue for 
consumers who have suffered steep rate hikes year after year. Since 
1996, cable rates have increased 58 percent or nearly three times the 
rate of inflation. The Federal Communications Commission, FCC, has 
found that rates increased 7 percent in 2001 and 2002, and 5 percent in 
2003. The FCC's most recent report found that rates again rose 5 
percent in 2004, double the rate of inflation, but only 3.6 percent 
where the local cable company faced competition. I can only imagine the 
savings consumers could reap if presented with a choice of providers of 
cable service and a choice of channels. For this reason I call on 
Congress to pass the CHOICE Act.
  A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that a majority of Americans 
would like to buy cable channels individually and an AP/Ipsos poll 
found that a remarkable 78 percent of Americans would like to do so. 
According to Nielsen Media Research, households receiving more than 70 
channels only watch, on average, about 17 of these. Consumers know that 
they could have greater control over their monthly bill if given the 
ability to choose their channels. This was recently confirmed by the 
FCC. This year the FCC found that consumers could save as much as 13 
percent on their monthly cable bills if they could buy only the 
channels they want.
  Mr. President, consider the situation of a senior citizen on fixed 
income living in Sun City, Arizona, who watches only a few news and 
movie channels, but continues to pay for high priced channels such as 
ESPN, Fox Sports, and MTV--channels that other consumers enjoy, but 
channels that certain seniors may not want and possibly cannot afford. 
In fact, the general manager of the Sun City cable system has told my 
staff that he has tried to drop several expensive music video channels 
from the company's channel lineup to

[[Page 10351]]

make room for channels his viewers want to receive and to decrease 
costs, but the owners of the music video channels have forbid him to do 
so without serious repercussions. So the residents of Sun City continue 
to subsidize the cost of these channels for viewers around the country. 
That is why AARP, representing 35 million senior citizens, supports the 
ability for viewers to buy channels on an a la carte basis. But again, 
cable companies don't have to listen to these 35 million viewers 
because there is no real threat of losing them. They have nowhere to 
turn.
  The CHOICE ACT, Mr. President, is not a mandate on cable providers. 
Instead it is designed to encourage choice and competition by granting 
significant regulatory relief to video service providers, such as 
telephone and cable companies, that agree to both offer cable channels 
on an a la carte basis to subscribers and to not prohibit any channel 
owned by the video service provider from being sold individually. In 
exchange, video service providers would receive the right to obtain a 
national franchise; would be permitted to pay lower fees to 
municipalities for the use of public rights of way; would benefit from 
a streamlined definition of ``gross video revenue'' for the calculation 
of such fees; and would gain a prohibition on the solicitation of 
institutional networks, in-kind donation, and unlimited public access 
channels.
  In addition, broadcasters that have an ownership stake in a cable 
channel would get the benefit of the FCC's network non-duplications 
rule if the broadcaster does not prohibit the channel from being sold 
individually. The FCC's network non-duplication rule provides 
exclusivity for broadcasters by not allowing another broadcaster with 
the same network affiliation from broadcasting in the same community. 
The bill would also modify Section 616(a) of the Communications Act 
that currently prohibits video service providers from using coercion or 
retaliatory tactics to prevent cable channels from making their 
services available to competing companies to extend this provision to 
distribution over the Internet.
  For example, if Time Warner Cable offered CNN, a cable channel it 
owns, on an a la carte basis to its cable subscribers and allowed other 
cable companies, satellite companies, and video programmers who choose 
to distribute CNN to make it available on an a la carte basis, Time 
Warner Cable would be eligible for a national franchise and other 
regulatory relief. If Disney, which owns ESPN, allowed other cable 
companies, satellite companies, and video programmers who choose to 
distribute ESPN to make it available on an a la carte basis, Disney's 
ABC broadcast stations would have the benefit of the FCC's network non-
duplication rule.
  Mr. President, contrary to what some might want the American people 
to believe, the CHOICE Act does not force video service providers or 
broadcasters to do a single thing. It is their choice whether to act or 
not act. The bill provides them with such a choice even though they 
currently don't provide meaningful choices to their customers. This 
bill is incentive-based legislation that would encourage owners of 
cable channels to make channels available for individual purchase and 
would do nothing to prevent cable companies from continuing to offer a 
bundle of channels or tiers of channels.
  The cable industry regularly touts the value of its package of 
channels, noting that it costs less than taking a family of four to a 
movie or professional sporting event. However, watching cable 
television is not always a family event. Several channels have 
programming that consumers find objectionable or that parents believe 
is unsuitable for young children. Complaints about indecent cable 
programming have increased exponentially in recent years. In 2004, the 
FCC received 700 percent more cable indecency complaints than it 
received in 2003. Most of the cable programs about which indecency 
complaints have been filed with the FCC aired during hours when many 
children are watching television.
  Cable and satellite companies currently provide subscribers with a 
variety of methods of blocking the audio and video programming of any 
channel that they do not wish to receive. However, subscribers are 
still required to pay for these channels that they find objectionable. 
The ``v-chip'' does not effectively protect children from indecent 
programming carried by video programming distributors. Most of the 
television sets currently in use in the United States are not equipped 
with a v-chip; of the 280 million sets currently in United States 
households, approximately 161 million television sets are not equipped 
with a v-chip. Households that have a television set with a v-chip are 
also likely to have one or more sets that are not equipped with a v-
chip.
  Again, Mr. President, I am aware that not all consumers want to block 
and not pay for certain channels, but shouldn't all consumers have the 
choice to do so? Cable programmers and broadcasters have started 
offering individual television programs for download on the Internet. 
This is the purest form of a la carte--where one can watch and pay for 
only specific programs they choose. In addition, many of these same 
broadcasters and cable programmers make their channels available for 
individual purchase in Hong Kong, Canada, and other countries. Why do 
these cable programmers treat the American cable subscriber differently 
than a subscriber in Hong Kong or Canada or an Internet user? It 
remains unclear.
  Lastly, Mr. President, I know that the cable programmers and 
broadcasters will not be the only group that may have some concerns 
with this bill. Many of my friends in local government are also likely 
to be interested in the reduced ``rights of way'' fee and streamlined 
definition of ``gross video revenue'' under this bill. Cable companies 
pay these fees to municipalities to use the right-of-way land under 
sidewalks, streets and bridges to reach customers' homes and then pass 
these fees on to subscribers. However, these fees often surpass the 
costs of managing ``rights of way'' land, and municipalities use these 
funds for other expenditures. Just last month at a hearing before the 
Senate Commerce Committee, Michael A. Guido, Mayor of Dearborn, 
Michigan, confirmed that these fees are often used to pay for other 
city expenses, such as emergency vehicles.
  In 2004, State and local governments collected approximately $2.4 
billion in these fees, slightly more than $37 per year from every 
household subscriber. Americans for Tax Reform believes that the 
``franchise fee is just a stealth tax on our consumption of the cable 
television,'' as do other economists and taxpayer advocacy groups. To 
this end, the legislature in my home state of Arizona just recently 
passed a bill to reduce such fees and taxes on cable television 
subscribers.
  The Phoenix Center, a non-partisan legal and economic think tank, has 
found that the introduction of competition to cable companies could 
allow the fee to be lowered ``significantly without doing any harm to 
local governments.'' Based upon this research, the CHOICE Act would 
reduce the fee from 5 percent to 3.7 percent for eligible video service 
providers and allow local governments to petition the FCC for a higher 
fee if it is necessary to cover the costs of managing ``rights of way'' 
land. I believe this would provide some real cost savings to cable 
subscribers.
  I remain open to working with municipalities on this issue and look 
forward to working with all interested parties to ensure that American 
consumers receive greater options for affordable and acceptable 
television viewing. Mr. President, I hope the introduction of the 
CHOICE Act furthers the debate on the issue of a la carte channel 
selection and I look forward to the Senate's consideration of the bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. OBAMA:
  S. 3475. A bill to provide housing assistance for very low-income 
veterans; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Homes for 
Heroes Act of 2006.
  When we talk about veterans in Washington, I often think about my 
grandfather, who signed up for duty in

[[Page 10352]]

World War II the day after Pearl Harbor. He marched across Europe in 
Patton's army, and when he came home to Kansas, he could have very 
easily faced some tough times.
  He could have had trouble paying for college, or finding a job, or 
even finding a home. But at the time, he lived in a country that 
recognized the value of his service--a country that kept its promise to 
defend those who have defended freedom. And so he was able to afford 
college through the G.I. Bill, and he was able to buy a house through 
the Federal Housing Administration, and he was able to work hard and 
raise a family and build his own American dream.
  And after I think about my grandfather, and the opportunities he had 
as a veteran, I then think about a veteran I met named Bill Allen, who 
told me that on a recent trip he took to Chicago, he actually saw 
homeless veterans fighting over access to the dumpsters. Think about 
that. Fighting over access to the dumpsters.
  Each and every night in this country, more than 200,000 of our 
Nation's veterans are homeless. And more than half a million will 
experience homelessness over the course of a year. There is no single 
cause for this. Homeless vets are men and women, single and married. 
They have served in every conflict since World War II. Many suffer from 
post-traumatic stress disorder; others were physically and mentally 
battered in combat. A large number left the military without job skills 
that could be easily used in the private sector.
  All have risked their lives for their country. All deserve--at the 
very least--the basic dignity of going to sleep at night with a roof 
over their head. And every day we allow them to go without, it brings 
shame to every single one of us.
  This is wrong. It is because we're quick to offer words of praise for 
our troops when they were abroad, but quick to forget about their needs 
when they come home. It's wrong because we have the resources and the 
programs in place to help solve this problem. And it is wrong on a 
fundamentally moral level--the idea that we would allow such brave and 
selfless citizens to suffer in such biting poverty. And so it is now 
our responsibility--it is now our duty--to make this right.
  Last year, I introduced the Sheltering All Veterans Everywhere Act, 
S. 1180--the SAVE Act--to strengthen services for homeless veterans. 
The SAVE Act would reauthorize and expand two of the most successful 
programs in dealing with homeless veterans: the Homeless Providers 
Grant and Per Diem Program and the Homeless Veterans Reintegration 
Program. In addition, the SAVE Act would expand the reach of the 
Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program to also include veterans at 
risk of homelessness, so that we can work to prevent homelessness 
before it happens.
  And while it is one thing to get veterans off the streets 
temporarily; it is another to keep them off--to place veterans in real, 
permanent homes. In fact, the VA has consistently identified permanent 
housing as one of the top three unmet needs in the fight against 
veteran homelessness.
  That is why I'm introducing a bill today called the Homes for Heroes 
Act. This is a bill that would help expand access to long-term, 
affordable housing by creating a fund so that the community and 
nonprofit organizations could purchase, build, or rehabilitate homes 
and apartments for veterans.
  So that we don't just leave them, to face their personal challenges 
on their own, the organizations would also provide services like 
counseling, employment training, and child care to the veterans who 
live in this housing. And the Homes for Heroes Act would expand the 
number of permanent housing vouchers for veterans from the current 
number of less than 2,000 to 20,000. These are vouchers that have been 
highly successful in giving veterans the chance to afford a place to 
live.
  Every day in America, we walk past men and women on street comers 
with handwritten signs that say ``Homeless Veteran--Will Work For 
Food.'' Sometimes we give a dollar; sometimes we just keep walking. 
These are soldiers who fought in World War II, Vietnam, and Iraq. They 
made a commitment to their country when they chose to serve--and now we 
must keep our commitment to them. Because when we make the decision to 
send our troops to war, we also make the decision to care for them, to 
speak for them, and to think of them--always--when they come home.
  This kind of America--an America of opportunity, of collective 
responsibility for each other--is the kind that any of our parents and 
grandparents came home to after the Second World War. Now it is time 
for us to build this America for those sons and daughters who come home 
today.
                                 ______
                                 
      Mr. AKAKA:
  S. 3476. to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish 
employee professional development programs at the Department of 
Homeland Security; to the Committe on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
will help train and motivate our homeland security workforce. As the 
ranking member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 
Federal Workforce Subcommittee, I understand the challenges facing the 
Department of Homeland Security, DHS. Our committee and subcommittee 
have held numerous hearings on a broad spectrum of DHS-related issues, 
including poor contract management, ineffective financial systems, and 
major human capital challenges. I have met with DHS employees and 
management officials to discuss problems ranging from leadership 
deficiencies and high employee turnover rates to management challenges. 
Vacancies resulting from the recent departures of key, high level 
officials further threaten employee morale and the Department's ability 
to provide for the security of our Nation. DHS cannot meet its mission 
if it does not have a well-trained and dedicated workforce. Failure to 
provide adequate training and career development programs for employees 
will have serious consequences for our national security.
  My bill, the Homeland Security Professional Development Act of 2006, 
will strengthen the workforce at DHS through the establishment of 
formal mentoring and rotational programs. The mentoring program will 
partner junior and entry level workers with more experienced employees 
to foster an understanding of how employees' roles and responsibilities 
fit into the Department's mission and to develop career goals. The 
voluntary rotation program would place midlevel employees in a 
different component of DHS for a period of time to provide for 
professional development; increased knowledge of the Department's 
various missions; and networking opportunities. Participants in the 
rotation program would be eligible for promotions or other employment 
preferences. Together the mentoring and rotational programs will 
improve communication; strengthen recruitment and retention programs; 
help with succession planning; enhance networking opportunities; and 
provide a pool of qualified future leaders.
  I commend DHS for recognizing the need to strengthen its workforce. 
Last July, the Department unveiled its Homeland Security Learning and 
Development Strategic Plan to align education, training, and 
professional development with the Department's strategic goals. The 
plan addresses the need to align education and professional development 
with the Department's vision, mission, core values, and strategic plan. 
However, this plan alone will not address the daunting challenges 
facing DHS. Congress must act to ensure that agency-wide employee 
development programs are in place to eliminate cultural and educational 
stovepipes.
  My bill will increase employee organizational knowledge and technical 
proficiency in the critical homeland security skill sets required to 
keep our Nation safe. For example, the Science and Technology 
Directorate, S&T, would benefit greatly from rotational programs with 
other DHS directorates and components, including Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement, ICE, and Customs and Border Protection,

[[Page 10353]]

CBP. Rotations between these entities would ensure that S&T projects 
and priorities are correctly aligned with ICE and CBP requirements, in 
addition to ensuring a cohesive homeland security workforce.
  Mentoring programs can hasten the learning curve for new employees, 
improve employee performance, and alter the culture of the organization 
by creating a collaborative, team-based, and results-oriented 
structure. Such programs have a proven track-record of success. 
According to the April 10, 2006, issue of Federal Human Resources Week, 
mentoring opportunities are welcomed by federal workers and help in 
recruitment and retention efforts. This finding is not new. A 1999 
workforce study found that 35 percent of private sector employees who 
did not receive regular mentoring planned to seek other jobs within the 
next 12 months. This number was reduced to 16 percent when employees 
received regular mentoring. In addition, according to the International 
Mentoring Association, employee supervision increases productivity by 
only 25 percent. However, when training is combined with coaching and 
mentoring, productivity is increased by an astounding 88 percent.
  One positive example of the benefits of mentoring is the apprentice 
program at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard in my home State of Hawaii. 
Established in 1924, the Pearl Harbor apprentice program has graduated 
thousands of highly qualified and skilled journeymen to ensure that the 
U.S. Navy remains ``Fit to Fight.''
  The Department of Homeland Security continues to face considerable 
management, leadership, and human capital challenges. The Homeland 
Security Professional Development Act of 2006 will tackle these 
challenges by building on the current training efforts of the 
Department and fostering a well-rounded and well-trained homeland 
security workforce. I urge my colleagues to support this important 
legislation and 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. 3476

       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 ``Homeland Security 
     Professional Development Act of 2006''.

     SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS AT 
                   THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

       (a) In General.--Title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 361 et seq.) is amended by inserting after 
     section 843 the following:

     ``SEC. 844. HOMELAND SECURITY MENTORING PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish 
     the Homeland Security Mentoring Program (in this section 
     referred to as the `Mentoring Program') for employees of the 
     Department. The Mentoring Program shall use applicable best 
     practices, including those from the Chief Human Capital 
     Officers Council.
       ``(2) Goals.--The Mentoring Program established by the 
     Secretary--
       ``(A) shall be established in accordance with the 
     Department Human Capital Strategic Plan;
       ``(B) shall incorporate Department human capital strategic 
     plans and activities, and address critical human capital 
     deficiencies, recruitment and retention efforts, and 
     succession planning within the Federal workforce of the 
     Department;
       ``(C) shall enable employees within the Department to share 
     expertise, values, skills, resources, perspectives, attitudes 
     and proficiencies to develop and foster a cadre of qualified 
     employees and future leaders;
       ``(D) shall incorporate clear learning goals, objectives, 
     meeting schedules, and feedback processes that will help 
     employees, managers, and executives enhance skills and 
     knowledge of the Department while reaching professional and 
     personal goals;
       ``(E) shall enhance professional relationships, contacts, 
     and networking opportunities among the employees of the 
     Department;
       ``(F) shall complement and incorporate (but not replace) 
     mentoring and training programs within the Department in 
     effect on the date of enactment of this section; and
       ``(G) may promote cross-disciplinary mentoring and training 
     opportunities that include provisions for intradepartmental 
     rotational opportunities, in accordance with human capital 
     goals and plans that foster a more diversified and effective 
     Federal workforce of the Department.
       ``(3) Training leaders council.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--The Training Leaders Council 
     established by the Chief Human Capital Officer shall 
     administer the Mentoring Program.
       ``(B) Responsibilities.--The Training Leaders Council 
     shall--
       ``(i) provide oversight of the establishment and 
     implementation of the Mentoring Program;
       ``(ii) establish a framework that supports the goals of the 
     Mentoring Program and promotes cross-disciplinary mentoring 
     and training;
       ``(iii) identify potential candidates to be mentors or 
     mentees and select candidates for admission into the 
     Mentoring Program;
       ``(iv) formalize mentoring assignments within the 
     Department;
       ``(v) formulate individual development plans that reflect 
     the needs of the Department, the mentor, and the mentee;
       ``(vi) coordinate with mentoring programs in the Department 
     in effect on the date of enactment of this section; and
       ``(vii) establish target enrollment numbers for the size 
     and scope of the Mentoring Program, under the human capital 
     goals and plans of the Department.
       ``(4) Selection of participants for mentoring program.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Mentoring Program shall consist of 
     middle and senior level employees of the Department with 
     significant experience who shall serve as mentors for junior 
     and entry level employees and employees who are critical to 
     Department succession plans and programs.
       ``(B) Selection of mentors.--Mentors shall be employees 
     who--
       ``(i) understand the organization and culture of the 
     Department;
       ``(ii) understand the aims of mentoring in Federal public 
     service;
       ``(iii) are available and willing to spend time with the 
     mentee, giving appropriate guidance and feedback;
       ``(iv) enjoy helping others and are open-minded, flexible, 
     empathetic, and encouraging; and
       ``(v) have very good communications skills, and stimulate 
     the thinking and reflection of mentees.
       ``(C) Selection of mentees.--Mentees shall be motivated 
     employees who possess potential for future leadership and 
     management roles within the Department.
       ``(5) Roles and responsibilities of participants in the 
     mentoring program.--
       ``(A) Mentors.--
       ``(i) Role.--A mentor shall serve as a model, motivator, 
     and counselor to a mentee.
       ``(ii) Limitation.--Any person who is the immediate 
     supervisor of an employee and evaluates the performance of 
     that employee may not be a mentor to that employee under the 
     Mentor Program.
       ``(iii) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of a mentor 
     may include--

       ``(I) helping the mentee set short-term learning objectives 
     and long-term career goals ;
       ``(II) helping the mentee understand the organizational 
     culture of the Department;
       ``(III) recommending or creating learning opportunities;
       ``(IV) providing informal education and training in areas 
     such as communication, critical thinking, responsibility, 
     flexibility, and teamwork; and
       ``(V) pointing out the strengths and areas for development 
     of the mentee.

       ``(B) Mentees.--The responsibilities of the mentee may 
     include--
       ``(i) defining short-term learning objectives and long-term 
     career goals;
       ``(ii) participating in learning opportunities to broaden 
     knowledge of the Department; and
       ``(iii) participating in professional opportunities to 
     improve a particular career area, develop an area of 
     technical expertise, grow professionally, and expand 
     leadership abilities.
       ``(6) Reporting.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the establishment of the Mentoring Program, the Secretary 
     shall submit a report on the status of the Mentoring Program 
     and enrollment, including the number of mentors and mentees 
     in each component of the Department and how the Mentoring 
     Program is being used in succession planning and leadership 
     development to--
       ``(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate;
       ``(B) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives; and
       ``(C) the Committee on Government Reform of the House of 
     Representatives.

     ``SEC. 845. HOMELAND SECURITY ROTATION PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish 
     the Homeland Security Rotation Program (in this section 
     referred to as the `Rotation Program') for employees of the 
     Department. The Rotation Program shall use applicable best 
     practices, including those from the Chief Human Capital 
     Officers Council.

[[Page 10354]]

       ``(2) Goals.--The Rotation Program established by the 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(A) be established in accordance with the Department 
     Human Capital Strategic Plan;
       ``(B) provide middle level employees in the Department the 
     opportunity to broaden their knowledge through exposure to 
     other components of the Department;
       ``(C) expand the knowledge base of the Department by 
     providing for rotational assignments of employees to other 
     components;
       ``(D) build professional relationships and contacts among 
     the employees in the Department;
       ``(E) invigorate the workforce with exciting and 
     professionally rewarding opportunities;
       ``(F) incorporate Department human capital strategic plans 
     and activities, and address critical human capital 
     deficiencies, recruitment and retention efforts, and 
     succession planning within the Federal workforce of the 
     Department; and
       ``(G) complement and incorporate (but not replace) 
     rotational programs within the Department in effect on the 
     date of enactment of this section.
       ``(3) Training leaders council.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Training Leaders Council established 
     by the Chief Human Capital Officer shall administer the 
     Rotation Program.
       ``(B) Responsibilities.--The Training Leaders Council 
     shall--
       ``(i) provide oversight of the establishment and 
     implementation of the Rotation Program;
       ``(ii) establish a framework that supports the goals of the 
     Rotation Program and promotes cross-disciplinary rotational 
     opportunities;
       ``(iii) establish eligibility for employees to participate 
     in the Rotation Program and select participants from 
     employees who apply;
       ``(iv) establish incentives for employees to participate in 
     the Rotation Program, including promotions and employment 
     preferences;
       ``(v) ensure that the Rotation Program provides 
     professional education and training;
       ``(vi) ensure that the Rotation Program develops qualified 
     employees and future leaders with broad-based experience 
     throughout the Department;
       ``(vii) provide for greater interaction among employees in 
     components of the Department; and
       ``(viii) coordinate with rotational programs within the 
     Department in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     section.
       ``(4) Allowances, privileges, and benefits.--All 
     allowances, privileges, rights, seniority, and other benefits 
     of employees participating in the Rotation Program shall be 
     preserved.
       ``(5) Reporting.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the establishment of the Rotation Program, the Secretary 
     shall submit a report on the status of the Rotation Program, 
     including a description of the Rotation Program, the number 
     of employees participating, and how the Rotation Program is 
     used in succession planning and leadership development to--
       ``(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate;
       ``(B) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives; and
       ``(C) the Committee on Government Reform of the House of 
     Representatives.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--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 843 the 
     following:

``Sec. 844. Homeland Security Mentoring Program.
``Sec. 845. Homeland Security Rotation Program.''.

     SEC. 3. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 41 of title 5, United States Code 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 4122. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

       ``The Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall 
     report annually to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Government Reform of the House of Representatives on the 
     training, mentoring, and succession plans and programs of 
     Federal agencies, including the number of participants, the 
     structure of the programs, and how participants are used for 
     leadership development and succession planning programs.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 41 of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 4121 
     the following:

``4122.  Reports to Congress.''.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     necessary to carry out this Act.

                          ____________________