[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1063-1074]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 279. A bill to repeal certain sections of the Act of May 26, 1936, 
pertaining to the Virgin Islands; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 283. A bill to amend the Compact of Free Association Amendments 
Act of 2003, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am joined by my colleague, and 
the Ranking Member of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 
Pete Domenici, on the introduction of two bills regarding the insular 
areas affiliated with the United States. The text of both of these 
bills is identical to the text of bills that passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent on September 29, 2006.
  The first bill, ``To Repeal Certain Sections of the Act of May 26, 
1936 Pertaining to the Virgin Islands,'' would repeal sections of a 
1936 law governing local U.S. Virgin Islands tax policy that were 
thought to have been effectively repealed in 1952. That year, Congress 
enacted the Virgin Islands Organic Act to establish local self-
government and to delegate certain local functions, including the 
development and administration of local property taxes, to a newly 
established local government. Notwithstanding this intent, in 2004, a 
Federal court ruled that these sections of the Act of 1936 are still in 
effect.
  The text of the bill introduced today is identical to S. 1829, as 
passed by the Senate four months ago. A hearing was held on that bill 
on October 25, 2005, and it was reported from the Committee on April 
20, 2006. Details on the background, purpose, and need for this 
legislation is available in Senate Hearing 109-291, and in Senate 
Report 109-236.
  The second bill being introduced today, ``To Amend the Compact of 
Free Association Amendments Act of 2003, and For Other Purposes,'' 
would make several relatively minor, clarifying, and technical changes 
to Public Law 108-188 which approved the Compact of Free Association 
between the U.S. and the Marshall Islands, and the Compact between the 
U.S. and Micronesia. The text of this bill is identical to S. 1830, as 
passed by the Senate four months

[[Page 1064]]

ago. A hearing was held on that bill on October 25, 2005, and it was 
reported from the Committee on April 20, 2006. Details on the 
background, purpose, and need for this legislation is available in 
Senate Hearing 109-291, and in Senate Report 109-237.
  Although relatively small and remote, the U.S.-affiliated insular 
areas are the home for many U.S. citizens, or for communities with 
which our Nation has special historical and political relationships. 
Maintaining and strengthening these relationships is a particular 
concern of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources because of its 
jurisdiction over matters relating to the territories and freely 
associated states. It is unfortunate that, last year, Senate passage of 
these bills was delayed leaving insufficient time for enactment. I look 
forward to working with members of the Committee and the Senate on 
their prompt consideration this session, and to their enactment as soon 
as possible.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the texts of the bills were ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 279

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

     SECTION 1. REPEAL OF CERTAIN LAWS PERTAINING TO THE VIRGIN 
                   ISLANDS.

       (a) Repeal.--Sections 1 through 6 of the Act of May 26, 
     1936 (48 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), are repealed.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     takes effect on July 22, 1954.
                                  ____


                                 S. 283

       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 ``Compacts of Free Association 
     Amendments Act of 2007''

     SEC. 2. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS.

       Section 101 of the Compact of Free Association Amendments 
     Act of 2003 (48 U.S.C. 1921) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence of subsection (a), by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``, including 
     Article X of the Federal Programs and Services Agreement 
     Between the Government of the United States and the 
     Government of the Federated States of Micronesia, as amended 
     under the Agreement to Amend Article X that was signed by 
     those 2 Governments on June 30, 2004, which shall serve as 
     the authority to implement the provisions thereof''; and
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (b), by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``, including 
     Article X of the Federal Programs and Services Agreement 
     Between the Government of the United States and the 
     Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, as 
     amended under the Agreement to Amend Article X that was 
     signed by those 2 Governments on June 18, 2004, which shall 
     serve as the authority to implement the provisions thereof''.

     SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.

       Section 105(f)(1) of the Compact of Free Association 
     Amendments Act of 2003 (48 U.S.C. 1921d(f)(1)) is amended by 
     striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:
       ``(A) Emergency and disaster assistance.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), section 
     221(a)(6) of the U.S.-FSM Compact and section 221(a)(5) of 
     the U.S.-RMI Compact shall each be construed and applied in 
     accordance with the 2 Agreements to Amend Article X of the 
     Federal Programs and Service Agreements signed on June 30, 
     2004, and on June 18, 2004, respectively.
       ``(ii) Definition of will provide funding.--In the second 
     sentence of paragraph 12 of each of the Agreements described 
     in clause (i), the term `will provide funding' means will 
     provide funding through a transfer of funds using Standard 
     Form 1151 or a similar document or through an interagency, 
     reimbursable agreement.''.

     SEC. 4. CLARIFICATIONS REGARDING PALAU.

       Section 105(f)(1)(B) of the Compact of Free Association 
     Amendments Act of 2003 (48 U.S.C. 1921d(f)(1)(B)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in clause (ii)(II), by striking ``and its territories'' 
     and inserting ``, its territories, and the Republic of 
     Palau'';
       (2) in clause (iii)(II), by striking ``, or the Republic of 
     the Marshall Islands'' and inserting ``, the Republic of the 
     Marshall Islands, or the Republic of Palau''; and
       (3) in clause (ix)--
       (A) by striking ``Republic'' both places it appears and 
     inserting ``government, institutions, and people'';
       (B) by striking ``2007'' and inserting ``2009''; and
       (C) by striking ``was'' and inserting ``were''.

     SEC. 5. AVAILABILITY OF LEGAL SERVICES.

       Section 105(f)(1)(C) of the Compact of Free Association 
     Amendments Act of 2003 (48 U.S.C. 1921d(f)(1)(C)) is amended 
     by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, 
     which shall also continue to be available to the citizens of 
     the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau, 
     and the Republic of the Marshall Islands who legally reside 
     in the United States (including territories and 
     possessions)''.

     SEC. 6. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Title I.--
       (1) Section 177 agreement.--Section 103(c)(1) of the 
     Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (48 U.S.C. 
     1921b(c)(1)) is amended by striking ``section 177'' and 
     inserting ``Section 177''.
       (2) Interpretation and united states policy.--Section 104 
     of the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (48 
     U.S.C. 1921c) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting ``the'' before 
     ``U.S.-RMI Compact,'';
       (B) in subsection (e)--
       (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) of paragraph 
     (8), by striking ``to include'' and inserting ``and 
     include'';
       (ii) in paragraph (9)(A), by inserting a comma after 
     ``may''; and
       (iii) in paragraph (10), by striking ``related to service'' 
     and inserting ``related to such services''; and
       (C) in the first sentence of subsection (j), by inserting 
     ``the'' before ``Interior''.
       (3) Supplemental provisions.--Section 105(b)(1) of the 
     Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (48 U.S.C. 
     1921d(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``Trust Fund'' and 
     inserting ``Trust Funds''.
       (b) Title II.--
       (1) U.S.-fsm compact.--The Compact of Free Association, as 
     amended, between the Government of the United States of 
     America and the Government of the Federated States of 
     Micronesia (as provided in section 201(a) of the Compact of 
     Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (117 Stat. 2757)) is 
     amended--
       (A) in section 174--
       (i) in subsection (a), by striking ``courts'' and inserting 
     ``court''; and
       (ii) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``the'' before 
     ``November'';
       (B) in section 177(a), by striking ``, or Palau'' and 
     inserting ``(or Palau)'';
       (C) in section 179(b), strike ``amended Compact'' and 
     inserting ``Compact, as amended,'';
       (D) in section 211--
       (i) in the fourth sentence of subsection (a), by striking 
     ``Compact, as Amended, of Free Association'' and inserting 
     ``Compact of Free Association, as amended'';
       (ii) in the fifth sentence of subsection (a), by striking 
     ``Trust Fund Agreement,'' and inserting ``Agreement Between 
     the Government of the United States of America and the 
     Government of the Federated States of Micronesia Implementing 
     Section 215 and Section 216 of the Compact, as Amended, 
     Regarding a Trust Fund (Trust Fund Agreement),'';
       (iii) in subsection (b)--

       (I) in the first sentence, by striking ``Government of 
     the'' before ``Federated''; and
       (II) in the second sentence, by striking ``Sections 321 and 
     323 of the Compact of Free Association, as Amended'' and 
     inserting ``Sections 211(b), 321, and 323 of the Compact of 
     Free Association, as amended,''; and

       (iv) in the last sentence of subsection (d), by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and the Federal 
     Programs and Services Agreement referred to in section 231'';
       (E) in the first sentence of section 215(b), by striking 
     ``subsection(a)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)'';
       (F) in section 221--
       (i) in subsection (a)(6), by inserting ``(Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency)'' after ``Homeland Security''; and
       (ii) in the first sentence of subsection (c), by striking 
     ``agreements'' and inserting ``agreement'';
       (G) in the second sentence of section 222, by inserting 
     ``in'' after ``referred to'';
       (H) in the second sentence of section 232, by striking 
     ``sections 102 (c)'' and all that follows through ``January 
     14, 1986)'' and inserting ``section 102(b) of Public Law 108-
     188, 117 Stat. 2726, December 17, 2003'';
       (I) in the second sentence of section 252, by inserting ``, 
     as amended,'' after ``Compact'';
       (J) in the first sentence of the first undesignated 
     paragraph of section 341, by striking ``Section 141'' and 
     inserting ``section 141'';
       (K) in section 342--
       (i) in subsection (a), by striking ``14 U.S.C. 195'' and 
     inserting ``section 195 of title 14, United States Code''; 
     and
       (ii) in subsection (b)--

       (I) by striking ``46 U.S.C. 1295(b)(6)'' and inserting 
     ``section 1303(b)(6) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 
     U.S.C. 1295b(b)(6))''; and
       (II) by striking ``46 U.S.C. 1295b(b)(6)(C)'' and inserting 
     ``section 1303(b)(6)(C) of that Act'';

       (L) in the third sentence of section 354(a), by striking 
     ``section 442 and 452'' and inserting ``sections 442 and 
     452'';
       (M) in section 461(h), by striking ``Telecommunications'' 
     and inserting ``Telecommunication'';
       (N) in section 462(b)(4), by striking ``of Free 
     Association'' the second place it appears; and
       (O) in section 463(b), by striking ``Articles IV'' and 
     inserting ``Article IV''.

[[Page 1065]]

       (2) U.S.-rmi compact.--The Compact of Free Association, as 
     amended, between the Government of the United States of 
     America and the Government of the Republic of the Marshall 
     Islands (as provided in section 201(b) of the Compact of Free 
     Association Amendments Act of 2003 (117 Stat. 2795)) is 
     amended--
       (A) in section 174(a), by striking ``court'' and inserting 
     ``courts'';
       (B) in section 177(a), by striking the comma before ``(or 
     Palau)'';
       (C) in section 179(b), by striking ``amended Compact,'' and 
     inserting ``Compact, as amended,'';
       (D) in section 211--
       (i) in the fourth sentence of subsection (a), by striking 
     ``Compact, as Amended, of Free Association'' and inserting 
     ``Compact of Free Association, as amended``;
       (ii) in the first sentence of subsection (b), by striking 
     ``Agreement between the Government of the United States and 
     the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands 
     Regarding Miliary Use and Operating Rights'' and inserting 
     ``Agreement Regarding the Military Use and Operating Rights 
     of the Government of the United States in the Republic of the 
     Marshall Islands concluded Pursuant to Sections 321 and 323 
     of the Compact of Free Association, as Amended (Agreement 
     between the Government of the United States and the 
     Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands Regarding 
     Military Use and Operating Rights)''; and
       (iii) in the last sentence of subsection (e), by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and the Federal 
     Programs and Services Agreement referred to in section 231'';
       (E) in section 221(a)--
       (i) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``Section 231'' and inserting ``section 231''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``(Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency)'' after ``Homeland Security'';
       (F) in the second sentence of section 232, by striking 
     ``sections 103(m)'' and all that follows through ``(January 
     14, 1986)'' and inserting ``section 103(k) of Public Law 108-
     188, 117 Stat. 2734, December 17, 2003'';
       (G) in the first sentence of section 341, by striking 
     ``Section 141'' and inserting ``section 141'';
       (H) in section 342--
       (i) in subsection (a), by striking ``14 U.S.C. 195'' and 
     inserting ``section 195 of title 14, United States Code''; 
     and
       (ii) in subsection (b)--

       (I) by striking ``46 U.S.C. 1295(b)(6)'' and inserting 
     ``section 1303(b)(6) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 
     U.S.C. 1295b(b)(6))''; and
       (II) by striking ``46 U.S.C. 1295b(b)(6)(C)'' and inserting 
     ``section 1303(b)(6)(C) of that Act'';

       (I) in the third sentence of section 354(a), by striking 
     ``section 442 and 452'' and inserting ``sections 442 and 
     452'';
       (J) in the first sentence of section 443, by inserting ``, 
     as amended.'' after ``the Compact'';
       (K) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) of section 
     461(h)--
       (i) by striking ``1978'' and inserting ``1998''; and
       (ii) by striking ``Telecommunications'' and inserting 
     ``Telecommunication Union''; and
       (L) in section 463(b), by striking ``Article'' and 
     inserting ``Articles''.

     SEC. 7. TRANSMISSION OF VIDEOTAPE PROGRAMMING.

       Section 111(e)(2) of title 17, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``or the Trust Territory of the Pacific 
     Islands'' and inserting ``the Federated States of Micronesia, 
     the Republic of Palau, or the Republic of the Marshall 
     Islands''.

     SEC. 8. PALAU ROAD MAINTENANCE.

       The Government of the Republic of Palau may deposit the 
     payment otherwise payable to the Government of the United 
     States under section 111 of Public Law 101-219 (48 U.S.C. 
     1960) into a trust fund if--
       (1) the earnings of the trust fund are expended solely for 
     maintenance of the road system constructed pursuant to 
     section 212 of the Compact of Free Association between the 
     Government of the United States of America and the Government 
     of Palau (48 U.S.C. 1931 note); and
       (2) the trust fund is established and operated pursuant to 
     an agreement entered into between the Government of the 
     United States and the Government of the Republic of Palau.

     SEC. 9. CLARIFICATION OF TAX-FREE STATUS OF TRUST FUNDS.

       In the U.S.-RMI Compact, the U.S.-FSM Compact, and their 
     respective trust fund subsidiary agreements, for the purposes 
     of taxation by the United States or its subsidiary 
     jurisdictions, the term ``State'' means ``State, territory, 
     or the District of Columbia''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Mr. McCain, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. 
        Snowe, Mr. Obama, and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 280. A bill to provide for a program to accelerate the reduction 
of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by establishing a 
market-driven system of greenhouse gas tradeable allowances, to support 
the deployment of new climate change-related technologies, and to 
ensure benefits to consumers from the trading in such allowances, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, on October 4 of last year, the Hadley 
Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, which houses Great 
Britain's leading climate scientists, projected that in the absence of 
prompt action to curb global warming, extreme drought will spread 
across one third of the Earth's land surface by the end of this 
century.
  On October 30, the head of the United Kingdom's Government Economic 
Service forecasted that unchecked global warming will cost the world 
between five and twenty percent of gross domestic product each year.
  On December 4, the director of the U.S. Center for Disease Control's 
National Center for Environmental Health cited global warming as ``the 
largest looming public health challenge we face.'' Insect-borne 
diseases such as malaria are expected to spike as tropical ecosystems 
expand; hotter air will exacerbate the air pollutants that send our 
children to the hospital with asthma attacks; food insecurity from 
shifting agricultural zones will spark border wars; and storms and 
coastal flooding from sea-level rise will cause mortality and 
dislocation.
  On December 14, in fact, the journal Science published a peer-
reviewed study projecting that unchecked global warming could cause sea 
levels to rise between a half meter and one-and-a-half meters above 
1990 levels by the end of this century. A sealevel rise in the middle 
of that range would submerge every city on the East Coast of the United 
States, from Miami to Boston.
  And on December 27, the Interior Department proposed to list the 
polar bear as threatened with extinction due to Arctic ice melt from 
global warming.
  When even erstwhile skeptics cite melting habitat as the reason polar 
bears are now threatened, I say the global warming debate is over. The 
American people want action, and they want it now.
  As you know, Senator McCain and I have brought our legislation to 
solve global warming to a vote in this chamber twice already, first in 
2003 and then again in 2005. On the same day that the Senate failed for 
a second time to pass our bill, in June 2005, this body fortunately did 
pass Senator Bingaman's resolution that the Congress should enact ``a 
comprehensive and effective national program of mandatory, market-based 
limits on emissions of greenhouse gases that slow, stop, and reverse 
the growth of such emissions.''
  Today I am reintroducing an improved version of my and Senator 
McCain's Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act. As the last version of 
the Act did, the version I introduce today carries the co-sponsorship 
of Senators Obama and Snowe. I am proud to say that improvements to the 
bill have now attracted the additional co-sponsorship of Senators 
Lincoln and Collins. Very shortly, I understand, Representatives Olver 
and Gilchrest will reintroduce this bill's companion in the House.
  The 2005 version of the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act would 
have capped U.S. greenhouse gas emissions at year 2000 levels without 
mandating further reductions. The new bill will gradually lower the 
emissions cap, such that it reaches approximately one third of 2000 
levels by 2050. Those long-term reductions will forestall catastrophic, 
manmade climate change, provided the world's other major economies 
follow suit within the next decade. Like the 2005 version, the 
reintroduced bill will control compliance costs by allowing companies 
to trade, save, and borrow emissions credits, and by allowing them to 
generate ``offset'' credits by inducing noncovered businesses, farms, 
and others to reduce their emissions or capture and store greenhouse 
gases. The reintroduced bill, however, will increase the availability 
of borrowing and offsets in order to control costs further.
  This bill will be referred to the Environment and Public Works 
Committee,

[[Page 1066]]

where I will chair a subcommittee on climate change. Colleagues of mine 
on that committee, including our esteemed chairwoman and my good 
friend, Senator Boxer, will have their own strong proposals for curbing 
global warming. I look forward to working with them to get 
comprehensive legislation reported favorably to the floor in a 
bipartisan manner. Senator Bingaman, the chairman of the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee, has invested a great deal of work and 
expertise in a comprehensive climate bill of his own. I believe Senator 
Bingaman will be highly influential in this process, and I look forward 
to working with him closely to solve this problem.
  With American know-how we can and will solve this problem. We will 
use the power of the free market to promote the rapid and widespread 
deployment of advanced technologies and practices for reducing 
greenhouse gas emissions. And we will do so without weakening the 
economic position of the United States or otherwise imposing hardship 
on its citizens.
  I would like to close by extending my heartfelt thanks to the 
distinguished majority leader, Senator Reid, for placing legislation to 
curb global warming among his top ten priorities for this Congress, and 
for memorializing that commitment with the introduction, as S. 6, of 
the National Energy and Environmental Security Act, a bill that I was 
proud to co-sponsor.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Lieberman 
today, along with our co-sponsors, Senators Snowe, Obama, Collins, and 
Lincoln, in introducing the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 
2007. This legislation is designed to significantly reduce the Nation's 
greenhouse gas emissions to prevent the dangerous impacts of climate 
change, enhance our national security and maintain the strength to our 
economy. It would be accomplished through a combination of trading 
markets and the deployment of advanced technologies.
  As I have stated on previous occasions, the design of this 
legislation is an evolving process. The legislation we are introducing 
today represents yet another step in that effort. Since our last vote 
on this legislation, Senator Lieberman and I have continued work on 
this proposal with the goal of producing the most innovative, 
meaningful, and economically feasible measure that can be embraced by 
the Senate. We believe the changes which we have made since we first 
introduced climate change legislation in the 108th Congress puts us on 
the path to achieving this goal, and we intend to make further 
improvements to this comprehensive legislation in the days ahead.
  We have continually worked with scientists, industry, 
environmentalists, as well as the faith-based community, to ensure that 
we are fully addressing the serious problem of global warming. We 
continue to learn more about the science and the impacts of climate 
change on a daily basis. We continue to work with economists and 
industry experts to ensure that our emissions goals do not hamstring 
our economic objectives. In particular, we continue to learn more about 
the power of the markets to control costs as emission credit trading 
continues in Europe and here in the U.S. I am confident that given the 
will, the Federal Government can be a lead advocate for ensuring that 
America is doing its part to reduce global warming, and join in the 
global effort that is needed to address this world-wide environmental 
issue.
  I want to mention the efforts of States like California, which has 
already enacted legislation requiring mandatory reduction of greenhouse 
gas emissions, and the Northeast States of Connecticut, Delaware, 
Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont, which are also 
seeking to limit emissions from power plants. Over 300 U.S. mayors have 
signed an agreement to reduce emissions in their cities.
  As these State plans and legislation are implemented, they will offer 
Congress and the Administration unique opportunities to review and 
incorporate lessons learned from these efforts into Federal 
legislation. Despite the improvements we have made in this version of 
our bill to be environmentally responsible and to minimize economic 
costs, we will continue to pursue new and innovative ideas that will 
further these objectives, and we will modify our bill accordingly.
  The legislation we submit today is designed to protect our 
environment from the impacts of the climate change resulting from the 
buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, improve our national 
security by reducing reliance on fossil fuels that often carry with 
them geopolitical costs, and position our economy to become a world 
leader in the expanding markets for development and deployment of new 
energy efficient technologies and renewable energy sources. It proposes 
the utilization of the ``cap and trade'' approach and promotes the 
commercialization of technologies that can significantly reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions, mitigate the impacts of climate change, and 
increase the nation's energy independence. And it will help to keep 
America at the cutting edge of innovation where the jobs and trade 
opportunities of the new economy are to be found. It will also serve to 
protect our country and the world from the security threat posed by 
populations whose health, livelihood, and variability are potentially 
threatened by global rising temperatures and altered environments.
  In fact, the cap and trade provisions and the technology title are 
complementary parts of a comprehensive program that will allow us to 
usher in a new energy era, an era of responsible and innovative energy 
production and use that will yield enormous environmental, economic, 
and diplomatic benefits. The cap and trade portion provides the 
economic driver for existing and new technologies capable of supplying 
reliable and clean energy and making the best use of America's 
available energy resources. Because of the multiple benefits promised 
by this comprehensive program, we expect that the new bill will attract 
additional support for the vital purposes of the Climate Stewardship 
and Innovation Act. We simply need the political will to match the 
public's concern about climate change, desire for national security, 
the economic interests of business and consumers, and American 
technological ingenuity and expertise.
  As I mentioned, we continue to learn more about the science of 
climate change and the dangerous precedence of not addressing this 
environmental problem. The science tells us that urgent and significant 
action is needed. Our National Academies of Sciences, along with the 
national academies from the other G8 nations, China, India, and Brazil, 
has said in a joint statement that ``there is now strong evidence that 
significant global warming is occurring.'' and ``[t] he scientific 
understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify 
nations taking prompt action.''
  We recognize that many fear the costs of taking action. But there are 
costs to delay as well. Failure to implement significant reductions in 
net greenhouse gas emissions in the near term will yield only more 
climate change and a much harder job in the future. Our comprehensive 
legislation is one approach to a productive, secure, and clean energy 
future. But it is only one approach and we welcome other proposals--let 
a thousand flowers bloom.
  Significant reductions in greenhouse gases--well beyond those 
required by this bill--are feasible over the next 15-20 years using 
technologies available today. Also, the most important technological 
deployment opportunities to reduce emissions over the next two decades 
lie with energy efficient technologies and renewable energy sources, 
including nuclear, solar, wind, and bio-fuels. For example, in the 
electric power sector, which accounts for one-third of U.S. emissions, 
major pollution reductions can be achieved by improving the efficiency 
of existing fossil fuel plants, adding new reactors designs for nuclear 
power, expanding use of renewable power sources, and significantly 
reducing electricity demand with the use of energy-saving technologies 
currently available to residential and commercial consumers. These

[[Page 1067]]

clean technologies need to be promoted and that is what spurs our 
action today.
  Let me take a moment to address a section of our legislation that has 
been the target of some concerns by environmentalists and others--
concerns that I believe are entirely unwarranted. The provisions in our 
bill to promote nuclear energy are an important part of the 
comprehensive technology package.
  I know that some of our friends here in the Senate and in the 
environmental community maintain strong objections to nuclear energy, 
even though today it supplies nearly 20 percent of the electricity 
generated in the U.S. and much higher proportions in places such as 
France, Belgium, Sweden and Switzerland--countries that are not exactly 
known for their environmental disregard. The fact is, nuclear energy is 
CLEAN. It produces ZERO emissions, while the burning of fossil fuels to 
generate electricity produces approximately 33 percent of the 
greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere, and is a major 
contributor to air pollution affecting our communities.
  The idea that nuclear power should play no role in our future energy 
mix is an unsustainable position, particularly given the urgency and 
magnitude of the threat posed by global warming which most regard as 
the greatest environmental threat to the planet.
  The International Energy Agency estimates that the world's energy 
consumption is expected to rise over 65 percent within the next fifteen 
years. If the demand for electricity is met using traditional coal-
fired power plants, not only will we fail to reduce carbon emissions as 
necessary, but the level of carbon in the atmosphere will skyrocket and 
intensify the greenhouse effect and the global warming it produces.
  As nuclear plants are decommissioned, the percentage of U.S. 
electricity produced by this zero-emission technology will actually 
decline. Therefore, at a minimum, we must make efforts to maintain 
nuclear energy's level of contribution, so that this capacity is not 
replaced with higher-emitting alternatives.
  No doubt, some people will object to the idea of the Federal 
Government playing any role in helping demonstrate and commercialize 
new and beneficial energy technologies, and particularly nuclear 
designs. We understand the power of markets to spur innovation and our 
proposals is built on this fundamental lesson. But the fact remains 
that the market playing field has been highly uneven--fossil fuels have 
been subsidized for many decades at levels that can scarcely be 
calculated. The enormous economic costs of damage caused by air 
pollution and greenhouse gas emissions to the environment and human 
health are not factored into the price of power produced by fossil-
fueled technologies. Yet, it's a cost that we all bear, too often in 
terms of ill-health and diminished quality of life. That is simply a 
matter of fact.
  It is also inescapable that the ability to avoid internalizing these 
costs placed produces at a great advantage over clean competitors. 
Based on that fact, and in light of the enormous environmental and 
economic risk posed by global warming, I believe that providing zero 
and low emission technologies such as nuclear a boost into the market 
place so that these clean technologies can be utilized as soon as 
possible is responsible public policy, and a matter of simple public 
necessity, particularly, as we work to promote America's energy 
independence.
  The Navy has operated nuclear powered submarines for more than 50 
years and has an impressive safety and performance record. The Naval 
Reactors program has demonstrated that nuclear power can be done 
safely. One of the underpinning of its safety record is the approach 
used in its reactor designs, which is to learn and built upon previous 
designs. Unfortunately for the commercial nuclear industry, they have 
not had the opportunity to use such an approach since the industry has 
not been able to build a reactor in over the past 25 years. This lapse 
in construction has led us to where we are today with the industry's 
aging infrastructure. As we have learned from other industries, this in 
itself represents a great risk to public safety.
  As Senator Lieberman and I have continued working for passage of 
legislation to address climate change in a meaningful way, it has 
become clear to us that any responsible climate change measure must 
contain five essential components:
  First, it must have rational, mandatory emission reduction targets 
and timetables. It must be goal oriented, and has both environmental 
and economic integrity. We need policy that will produce necessary 
outcomes, not merely check political boxes. The goal must be feasible 
and based on sound science, and this is what we have tried to do in 
this bill.
  Second, it must utilize a market-based cap and trade system. It must 
limit greenhouse gas emissions and allows the trading of emission 
credits to drive enterprise, innovation and efficiency. This is the 
central component of our legislation. Voluntary efforts will not change 
the status quo, taxes are counterproductive, and markets are more 
dependable than regulators in effecting sustainable change.
  Third, it must include mechanisms to minimize costs and work 
effectively with other markets. The ``trade'' part of ``cap and trade'' 
is such a mechanism, but it's clear it must be bolstered by other 
assurances that costs will be minimized. I am as concerned as anyone 
about the economic impacts associated with any climate change 
legislation. I know that many economists are developing increasingly 
sophisticated ways to project future costs of compliance. Lately, we 
have seen the increased interest in this area of research. As we learn 
more from these models about additional action items to further reduce 
costs, we intend to incorporate them. Already, based upon earlier 
economic analysis, we have added ``offsets'' provisions in this bill in 
an effort to minimize costs and to provide for the creation of new 
markets. And, I assure my colleagues, we will continue to seek new and 
innovative ways to further minimize costs.
  Fourth, it must spur the development and deployment of advanced 
technology. Nuclear, solar, and other alternative energy must be part 
of the equation and we need a dedicated national commitment to develop 
and bring to market the technologies of the future as a matter of good 
environmental and economic policy. There will be a growing global 
market for these technologies and the U.S. will benefit greatly from 
being competitive and capturing its share of these markets. This 
legislation includes a detailed technology title that would go a long 
way toward meeting this goal. Unlike the Energy bill, it would be 
funded using the proceeds from the auctioning of allowable emission 
credits, rather than from the use of taxpayers' funds or appropriations 
that will never materialize.
  And fifth, it must facilitate international efforts to solve the 
problem. Global warming is an international problem requiring an 
international effort. The United States has an obligation to lead. Our 
leadership cannot replace the need for action by countries such as 
India and China. We must spur and facilitate it. We have added 
provisions that would allow U.S. companies to enter into partnerships 
in developing countries for the purpose of conducting projects to 
achieve certified emission reductions, which may be traded on the 
international market.
  These five components represent a serious challenge that will require 
a great deal of effort, the concentration of substantial intellectual 
power, and the continued efforts of our colleagues and those in the 
environmental, industry, economic, and national security communities. 
We look forward to collaborating in this effort as we continue to shape 
our legislation to its most effective form.
  The status quo is a strong and stubborn force. People and 
institutions are averse to change, even when that change is critical 
for their own well-being, and that of their children and grandchildren. 
If the scientists are right and temperatures continue to rise, we could 
face environmental, economic, and national security consequences far 
beyond our ability to

[[Page 1068]]

imagine. If they are wrong and the Earth finds a way to compensate for 
the unprecedented levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, what 
will we have accomplished? Cleaner air; greater energy efficiency, a 
more diverse and secure energy mix, and U.S. leadership in the 
technologies of the future. There is no doubt; failure to act is the 
far greater risk.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to offer, with my colleagues 
Senators Lieberman, McCain, Obama, Lincoln, and Collins, S. 280, the 
bipartisan Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act that requires the 
United States to take actions to reduce manmade greenhouse gas 
emissions for the protection of both our environment and our economy. 
This legislation takes concrete steps by using a fair, market-based 
system to once and for all demonstrate leadership on climate change and 
reduce emissions in the United States. Furthermore, it will do so 
without weakening the economic position of the United States or 
otherwise imposing hardship on its citizens.
  Ongoing peer-reviewed scientific and economic research demonstrates 
that climate change is one of the most significant environmental and 
economical issues of the 21st century, impacting the planet's weather 
patterns, resulting in more severe, sustained storm systems, floods, 
heat waves, and droughts. Yet, I have grave concerns that the lack of 
domestic climate change policy is akin to Nero's approach, fiddling as 
the planet warms.
  With overwhelming scientific evidence that global warming is 
adversely impacting the health of our planet, the time has come for the 
Congress to step up and take action. Anthropogenic greenhouse gas 
emissions that enter the atmosphere today from all sectors of our 
society will last for generations to come threatening our oceans, our 
environment and the economic well-being of our country and the world. 
It is beyond dispute that we cannot afford the price of inaction.
  The urgency is clear as climate change is no longer an abstract 
concept. Sea levels are rising, polar ice caps are melting. Indeed, 
earlier this month the Bush administration listed the polar bear a 
threatened species. Department of Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne 
stated, ``Polar bears are one of nature's ultimate survivors. They're 
able to live and thrive in one of the world's harshest environments, 
but there's concern that their habitat may literally be melting away.'' 
The listing document says that the polar bear's ice habitat that is 
used as platforms for hunting, mating and resting could vanish within 
half a century.
  The majestic polar bear of the Arctic may well be the symbol of 
climate change just as the bald eagle was when Rachel Carson published 
her stunning book ``Silent Spring'' in 1962 that linked the DDT 
pesticide to the fate of our national symbol--and created an 
environmental conscious for the country.
  It is obvious that new and longer term ideas for securing both 
domestic and international cooperation are necessary as we cannot get 
to the heart of this global problem without the world's major economies 
taking domestic actions. Clearly, as the causes of climate change are 
global and the atmosphere knows no boundaries, the challenge can only 
be met with all the countries of the world working together.
  That is why when asked by three major independent think tanks--the 
Center for American Progress in the U.S., the Institute for Public 
Policy Research in the U.K. and the Australia Institute--I accepted the 
co-chairmanship of the high-level International Climate Change 
Taskforce--the ICCT--to chart a way forward on climate change on a 
parallel track with the Kyoto Protocol process. The report from this 
Taskforce, Meeting the Climate Challenge, recommends ways to involve 
the world's largest economies in the effort, including the U.S. and 
major developing nations, focusing on creating new agreements to 
achieve the deployment of clean energy technologies, and a new global 
policy framework that is both inclusive and fair.
  The Taskforce, along with Co-chair, the Rt. Honorable Stephen Byers 
of the U.K., includes an international, cross-party, cross-sector 
collaboration of leaders from public service, science, business and 
civil society from both developed and developing countries. We set out 
a pathway to solve climate change issues in tandem--collaboratively 
finding common ground through recommendations that are both ambitious 
and realistic to engage all countries, and, critically, including those 
not bound by the Kyoto Protocol and major developing countries. We hope 
our proposals will be a prelude to the international dialogue and, 
ultimately, set the score for lasting change.
  The Report calls for the establishment of a long-term objective of 
preventing global average temperature from rising more than 3.6 degree 
Fahrenheit, 2 degrees Centigrade, above the pre-industrial level by the 
end of the century.
  The Taskforce arrived at the 2 degrees Centigrade--or 3.6 degree 
Fahrenheit--temperature increase goal on the basis of an extensive 
review of the relevant scientific literature that shows that, as the 
ICCT Report states, ``Beyond the 2 degree Centigrade level, the risks 
to human societies and ecosystems grow significantly. It is likely, for 
example, that average temperature increases larger than this will 
entail substantial agricultural losses, greatly increases numbers of 
people at risk of water shortages, and widespread adverse health 
impacts.''
  Our Report goes on to say that, ``Climate science is not yet able to 
specify the trajectory of atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse 
gases that corresponds precisely to any particular global temperature 
rise. Based on current knowledge, however, it appears that achieving a 
high probability of limiting global average temperature rise to 2 
degrees C will require that the increase in greenhouse-gas 
concentrations as well as all the other warming and cooling influences 
on global climate in the year 2100, as compared with 1750, should add 
up to a net warming no greater than what would be associated with a 
CO2 concentration of about 400 parts per million (ppm)''.
  This goal of the ICCT comports well with the Climate Stewardship and 
Innovation Act we are introducing today because the legislation creates 
a domestic market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce manmade carbon 
dioxide emissions with specific targets to meet specific dates. The 
bill will also make the U.S. a partner in the vast community of 
developed countries who have adopted national mandatory cap-and-trade 
systems for carbon emissions. I believe it will also bring emerging 
economies to the international negotiating table, such as China, who is 
predicted to surpass the U.S. as the largest emitter of greenhouse 
gases by 2010--China who is putting on line one carbon-spewing coal-
fired power plant each week.
  Achieving success for climate change legislation that calls for 
realistic reductions of greenhouse gases by setting certain targets 
means disabusing skeptics and opponents alike of cherished mythologies 
that environmental protection and economic growth are mutually 
exclusive. The irony is both are actually increasingly interdependent 
and will only become more so as the 21st century progresses. Robust 
companies dedicated to reducing emissions are proof-positive ``going-
green'' represents a burgeoning sector of our economy, not the drain 
and hindrance we've been led to believe for so many years. This bill 
accommodates for the early actions these companies have taken to reduce 
emissions.
  And to their credit--the most progressive U.S. companies have reduced 
emissions even further than required in the Climate Stewardship and 
Innovation Act. In an act of economic acumen, they are hedging their 
bets by adopting internal targets. And, these companies are saving 
money by reducing their energy consumption and positioning themselves 
to compete in the growing global market for climate-friendly 
technologies. Any cost-conscious CFO--or forward-thinking CEO for that 
matter--should admit that to prevent pollution now will most certainly 
cost less than cleaning it up later.
  The economics of prevention and stewardship resonate more when you

[[Page 1069]]

consider property that erodes because of rising sea levels, farm land 
that fails to yield crops and becomes barren and arid, and revenue 
opportunities squandered because of dwindling fishing stocks caused by 
hotter temperatures. These represent real costs to the bottom line--not 
to mention irreparable damage to our health and quality of life. We 
procrastinate on these policy imperatives at the peril of both our 
country and our planet. Congress is quite facile at deferring costs to 
the future, often with enormous consequences. No one was more aware of 
this tendency than Abraham Lincoln, who--in his Message to Congress in 
1862--offered this challenge to the legislative branch, ``The dogmas of 
the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is 
piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our 
case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew.''
  We have a choice between an ever more treacherous path of greater 
environmental damage and economic harm, or an upward path to a better 
future for our planet, and enhanced competitiveness for our industries. 
I urge my colleagues to join with those of us who believe we should 
move forward by taking appropriate actions now for global warming 
reductions so that we may leave behind a better environment that was 
bestowed to us.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, more than 18 months ago I stood in this 
Chamber to express my support for a previous version of the Climate 
Stewardship and Innovation Act, and to urge the support of my 
colleagues. On that day, I said that there are moments when we have the 
chance to take a new course that will leave our children a better 
world. However, in the interim, Congress has chosen not to act. In the 
interim, our Nation, and others around the world, continued to release 
greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at increasing rates.
  With each passing year, as we choose not to act, the air we breathe 
contains ever more carbon dioxide, resulting from our use of fossil 
fuels. If we continue on our present course, human endeavors could 
cause a rise in temperature equivalent to the change between the last 
ice age and today. The decisions we make now on greenhouse gas 
emissions will have effects in the second half of this century, and 
into the next. The consequences of our inaction will be devastating for 
our children and grandchildren, and will be even worse for the poorest 
global populations.
  Climate change is not reflected just in the fact that last year was 
the warmest year on record in the United States, or in the recent 
proposal that polar bears be listed as an endangered species because 
Arctic ice is melting. Those are just symptoms. The bigger problem is 
that global climate change will, in this century and the next, have 
effects on human health, on access to water, and on production of food.
  Our inaction may reflect a misunderstanding of scientific evidence, 
even though such evidence accumulates, year by year, showing that 
climate change is a global threat resulting from human activity. 
Perhaps our inaction betrays an uncertainty about our ability to 
address this problem. Or perhaps our inaction is simply a result of 
inertia, a lack of political will in facing a difficult problem.
  Whatever the basis of our inaction, I am convinced that we must now 
act. Every delay makes a solution more distant, and more difficult. I 
am also convinced that the best solution takes the form of the Climate 
Stewardship Act, which addresses the real costs and consequences of our 
current patterns of energy use, establishing a framework for a market-
based solution which relies on American will, ingenuity, and 
technological expertise to mitigate climate change.
  This bill establishes limits for greenhouse gas emissions well into 
the 21st century. To remain below these limits, the bill encourages the 
market to determine how best to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 
rewarding cost-effective approaches using a system of tradeable 
allowances.
  Revenues generated from this program will be used to help the 
industries and individuals most affected by the limits. These revenues 
will also fund research and development of efficient energy 
technologies, such as green buildings, high-power batteries for hybrid 
cars, safer nuclear plants to generate electricity, large scale 
biofuels facilities, renewable sources, and advanced coal power plants 
that capture the carbon dioxide they generate. This program will spur 
American innovation, creating business opportunities as new markets are 
created in low-carbon technologies and services.
  I am proud to join Senators Lieberman and McCain in introducing this 
legislation, and I urge others to join this effort. I also look forward 
to the support of the American people as we move together to confront 
the very real threat to future generations of global climate change.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 282. A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to reduce 
over a 5-year period the interest rate on certain undergraduate student 
loans; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support the ``College Student Relief Act.'' In 1958, spurred on by the 
launch of the Russian satellite, Sputnik, Congress passed the National 
Defense Education Act in order to ensure that through education, the 
United States would stay ahead of the Soviet Union in the space race. 
Because of the low interest loans offered through the National Defense 
Education Act, countless students were able to obtain a college 
education and help move America forward. I could never have attended 
Georgetown University and law school were it not for the government 
loans.
  It is unquestionable that higher education plays a critical role in 
the future of our children. Over the course of a lifetime, a college 
graduate will earn over $1 million more than those without college 
degrees. In addition to the individual benefits of a college education, 
investing in and producing more college-educated Americans is vital to 
our Nation's growth. Economists estimate that the increase in the 
education level of the United States labor force between 1915 and 1999 
directly resulted in at least 23 percent of the overall growth in U.S. 
productivity. To keep America at the economic forefront in the 21st 
Century, we must recognize the value of investing in higher education 
and provide students with the assistance they need so that they can 
compete in the global economy.
  As college costs continue to skyrocket, attaining a college education 
is becoming an even bigger hurdle for many American students. Millions 
of eligible students never even make it to college because of financial 
barriers. Over the last five years, tuition, fees, room and board at 
four-year public colleges and universities increased by 42 percent. 
More than two-thirds of four- year college students now borrow to pay 
for school, and their average debt more than doubled between 1993 and 
2004. According to the Congressional Advisory Committee on Student 
Financial Assistance, financial barriers will prevent 4.4 million high 
school graduates from attending a four-year public college over the 
next decade, and prevent another two million eligible students from 
attending college at all.
  Last year, Republicans missed an opportunity to prevent higher 
student loan interest rates from going into effect. On July 1, 2006, 
student loan interest rates went from a 5.3 percent variable rate to a 
6.8 percent fixed rate for student borrowers. We can address this 
situation and take the first step towards helping millions of college 
students across the Nation realize the American dream--achieving a 
college education.
  That's why I'm introducing the College Student Relief Act of 2007. 
The bill cuts interest rates on subsidized student loans in half and 
will help lower the interest rates for 5.5 million college students. 
The bill phases in interest rate cuts over five years, from a 6.8 
percent fixed rate to a 3.4 percent fixed rate for undergraduate 
borrowers of new subsidized student loans. Once fully implemented, 
these cuts will save

[[Page 1070]]

the typical borrower--with $13,800 in need-based loan debt--
approximately $4,400 in interest costs over the life of his or her 
loan.
  Smart, hard-working kids deserve a chance to go as far as their 
talents will take them; however, large education debt changes the 
future in ways that cannot be quantified. Career plans are changed. 
Lifestyles are restricted. Home and auto purchases are put on hold. 
Family plans may be delayed to accommodate debt payments.
  Let me share a few stories with you that illustrate the effects of 
carrying large education debt. When Stacie Odhner-Sibley and her 
husband made the decision ten years ago that she would go back to 
school and obtain her Bachelor's degree in order to provide a better 
future for their family, she was the first in her family to go to 
college. Fast forward to today. Stacie now has her Bachelor's degree 
and a Master's degree in School Guidance and Counseling. While this is 
the happy part of Stacie's story, the sad part is that Stacie and her 
husband are considering uprooting their three children and selling 
their home because they can't afford both student loans and a mortgage. 
The saddest part of Stacie's story is that the money her family would 
realize from the sale of their home won't even pay off the student 
loans. It will only be enough to take off some of the financial 
pressure they otherwise would be feeling.
  Katie Miller is a student at Southern Illinois University at 
Edwardsville. Katie's story is not uncommon. She works part-time and 
her parents are unable to provide her with any financial assistance. 
She is extremely grateful for the financial aid she receives and 
recognizes that without it, she would not be able to go to school even 
though she is struggling to pay for food, insurance and other basic 
necessities.
  Summer Boyd is an elementary teacher in Decatur, IL. She graduated 
from Millikin University in 2003 with $65,000 in student loans. As with 
Katie, Summer's parents could not afford to help pay for her college 
education. So, for the next 25 years, Summer will be paying over $500 
each month toward her student loans. She doesn't mind paying for her 
education; however, the heavy burden of her student loan debt is 
already affecting her future plans. She and her husband want to have 
children, but for the time being, they must continue to scrape by each 
month and can only hope to someday be able to afford children.
  Young people like Stacie, Katie and Summer should not face such high 
penalties because they had the desire and determination to pursue 
higher education.
  An investment in our children's education is an investment in our 
Nation's future. We must do what we can today to ensure that America 
remains a global leader in the future. Our Nation will be richer--not 
just economically, but also culturally and socially--for having given a 
higher priority to making college affordable.
  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. 282

       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 ``College Student Relief Act 
     of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. APPLICABLE INTEREST RATES.

       Section 427A(l) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1077a(l)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and subject to 
     paragraph (4)'' after ``Notwithstanding subsection (h)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Special rule for subsidized undergraduate loans.--
     Notwithstanding subsection (h), with respect to any loan 
     made, insured, or guaranteed under this part (other than a 
     loan made pursuant to section 428B, 428C, or 428H) to or for 
     an undergraduate student for which the first disbursement is 
     made on or after--
       ``(A) July 1, 2007, the applicable rate of interest shall 
     be 6.12 percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan;
       ``(B) July 1, 2008, the applicable rate of interest shall 
     be 5.44 percent on such balance;
       ``(C) July 1, 2009, the applicable rate of interest shall 
     be 4.76 percent on such balance;
       ``(D) July 1, 2010, the applicable rate of interest shall 
     be 4.08 percent on such balance; and
       ``(E) July 1, 2011, the applicable rate of interest shall 
     be 3.40 percent on such balance.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY:
  S. 288. A bill to amend titles 10 and 14, United States Code, to 
provide for the use of gold in the metal content of the Medal of Honor; 
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, this week Cpl Jason Dunham was posthumously 
recognized for his bravery in Iraq with the Congressional Medal of 
Honor. Corporal Dunham exemplified the valor and selflessness of an 
American service member. As a leader of his Marine Corps rifle squad 
Corporal Dunham encountered an Iraqi insurgent along the Iraq/Syria 
border. Corporal Dunham wrestled the insurgent to the ground when he 
become aware that he was about to throw a grenade he had been hiding. 
Without a moment's hesitation, Corporal Dunham sacrificed himself and 
threw himself on the grenade, using his body as a shield for the rest 
of his unit. He died from the wounds he sustained from the blast--but 
his act of heroism saved two Marine lives.
  Today I reintroduce a bill that would ensure that this Nation more 
appropriately honors our veterans and soldiers like Corporal Dunham. 
This bill requires the use of 90 percent gold in the Congressional 
Medal of Honor instead of gold-plated brass, as is currently used.
  The Medal of Honor is the highest award our country bestows for valor 
in action against an enemy force. These are ordinary soldiers who 
performed extraordinary deeds in battle, often giving what President 
Lincoln termed ``the final full measure'' in doing so.
  Corporal Dunham in receiving this honor joins many other noble 
service members. This is the medal won by Marine Corps pilot, CPT Joe 
Foss, who in less than 30 days of combat over Guadalcanal, shot down 23 
enemy planes, three in one engagement, and is credited with turning-
back an entire Japanese bombing mission before it could drop a single 
bomb.
  This is the medal won by Army PVT Edward Moskala who set aside his 
personal safety one night on the island of Okinawa to assault two 
machine gun nests, provide cover for his unit as it withdrew, and 
rescue fallen comrades amidst a hail of enemy fire before finally 
suffering a mortal wound.
  This is the medal won by PMFC Francis Pierce, Jr., who on the island 
of Iwo Jima exposed himself repeatedly to enemy fire to save the lives 
of Marines he accompanied, traversing open terrain to rescue comrades 
and assaulting enemy positions that endangered his wounded comrades.
  This is the medal won by Air Force CPT Hilliard A. Wilbanks who made 
repeated strafing runs over an advancing enemy element near Dalat, 
Republic of Vietnam on February 24, 1967. Captain Wilbanks' aircraft, 
it should be noted, was neither armed nor armored. He made the assaults 
by sticking his rifle out the window and flying low over the enemy. His 
action saved the lives of friendly forces, but it cost him his own.
  Corporal Dunham has now been added to this esteemed group of heroes. 
Their brave acts are more than just inspirational stories, they are 
sacrifices made by real men and women that serve their country with 
pride.
  This is a time in history when we are asking more and more from our 
men and women in uniform. They answer this call every time with honor 
and sacrifice. We should make the medals we award them for these acts 
commensurate with their dedication.
  Regrettably, the medal itself, though gold in color, is actually 
brass plated with gold. It costs only about $30 to craft the award 
itself. As a veteran I recognize the value of the Medal does not lie in 
its composition but the sacrifices and service that merited it. 
However, this is a small way that we can express our gratitude to these 
heroes by giving them a medal that shows the depth of our appreciation.
  Compared with other medals, the Congressional Medal of Honor, which 
is

[[Page 1071]]

meant to be one of the country's highest honors, falls woefully short. 
Congress awards foreign dignitaries, famous singers, and other 
civilians, with medals that cost up to $30,000. For our veterans that 
give so much of themselves to this country you will agree that we can 
do better.
  Put simply, this legislation will forge a medal more worthy of the 
esteem with which the nation holds those few who have earned the 
Congressional Medal of Honor through valor and heroism beyond compare.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Cardin, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, 
        Mr. Casey, and Mr. Rockefeller):
  S. 289. A bill to establish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground 
National Heritage Area, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Journey 
Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act, S. 289, a piece of 
legislation that seeks to designate some of Virginia's, indeed 
America's, most historic and beautiful lands as a national heritage 
area.
  As I am sure my colleagues are aware, national heritage areas are 
intended to encourage residents, government agencies, nonprofit groups, 
and private partners to collaboratively plan and implement programs and 
projects to recognize, preserve, and celebrate many of America's 
defining landscapes. Today, there are 37 national heritage areas spread 
out across the United States.
  In Virginia, we are lucky enough to have a landscape that is worthy 
of the recognition and celebration that a national heritage area 
designation would afford it. Stretching through four states, and 
generally following the path of the Old Carolina Road, today's Route 
15, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground is home to some of our Nation's 
greatest historic, cultural, and natural treasures. The region's riches 
read like a star-studded list of American History: Monticello, 
Montpelier, Manassas, Gettysburg. The list goes on. In all, there are 
eight presidential homes, 15 National Historic Landmarks, 47 historic 
districts, and the largest collection of Revolutionary and Civil War 
battlefields in the country. It is an area, literally, where America 
happened.
  With the help and tutelage of the National Park Service, this 
proposed heritage area would be managed by the Journey Through Hallowed 
Ground Partnership, a nonprofit entity whose sole purpose is to trumpet 
the magnificence of the hallowed ground's offerings. I am confident 
that the Partnership will be tremendous promoters and wonderful 
stewards of the resources within the Route 15 corridor. Already, the 
partnership has spent years heralding the Region's spectacular natural 
and historical resources, and they have worked hard to get this area 
the designation and recognition it deserves.
  Mr. President, no area in America could possibly be more deserving of 
the national heritage area designation than the region affectionately 
known as the Journey Through Hallowed Ground. Therefore, I urge my 
colleagues to join me in support of this legislation, and I thank you 
for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the Journey Through Hallowed 
Ground National Heritage Area Act.
  Mr. WEBB. Mr. President, I am proud to support the Journey Through 
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act. Today, that bill is being 
introduced by my esteemed colleague, Senator Warner, along with myself 
and other Members of the Senate. A bipartisan group also has introduced 
this bill in the House of Representatives.
  This bill will designate the corridor that runs between Gettysburg, 
PA, and Charlottesville, VA, as a National Heritage Area. Within this 
proposed area, there are numerous sites of historic importance, 
including eight Presidential homes. This hallowed ground is a 
geographic area of immense beauty, history, and cultural significance, 
which will be protected under the terms of this bill.
  For me, this hallowed ground has special personal significance, 
drawing me back to thoughts of my ancestors who settled and worked much 
of this land centuries before. I cannot visit this part of the country 
without harkening back to the tough, resilient women on buckboard 
wagons, hard men with rifles walking alongside, and kids tending cattle 
as they made their way down the mud trail called the Wilderness Road.
  As I wrote in my book ``Born Fighting,'' my ancestors--the Scots-
Irish--were a proud, adventurous people who left their native lands for 
the early American colonies in the 18th century. The majority of these 
courageous pioneers settled along the Appalachian Mountains from 
Pennsylvania southward into Virginia and beyond. Ultimately, they 
migrated westward, in the process helping to shape America's 
independent, individualistic, unbridled culture.
  This bill will help preserve the legacy of these early settlers for 
future generations. Moreover, this bill is a truly patriotic piece of 
legislation--one that will help us capture the rich diversity and 
historic experiences of our American forefathers and mothers.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 290. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a tax credit to rural primary health providers; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the ``Rural 
Physicians' Relief Act of 2007.'' This important legislation will bring 
needed assistance to physicians who provide primary health services to 
rural America.
  Physicians who provide health care in the most rural locations in 
America face challenges unlike their more urban counterparts. Often 
great distances, remote locations, limited transportation, and harsh 
climate--combine to make health care delivery extremely difficult to 
say the very least. Patient populations are small and spread out across 
extremely remote areas. As a result, many of these areas tend to be the 
most medically underserved areas in the Nation.
  In my State of Alaska, a State that is larger than the States of 
California, Texas and Montana combined, nearly one-quarter of the 
State's population live in communities and villages that are only 
reachable by boat or aircraft. In fact, Alaska has fewer roads than any 
other State--even fewer roads than Rhode Island. And, unlike Rhode 
Island where over 90 percent of the roads are paved, less than 20 
percent of the roads are paved in Alaska.
  This means that approximately 75 percent of Alaskan communities are 
not connected by road to another community with a hospital. This means 
that all medical supplies, patients and providers must travel by air.
  These remote populations tend to be among the poorest in the State. 
Air travel equates to excessively high health care costs--generally 70 
percent higher than costs in the Lower 48 States. In short, ``rural'' 
takes on a new definition in Alaska.
  In Alaska, patient access to health care is exacerbated because our 
State also faces a chilling crisis--we have 25 percent to 30 percent 
fewer physicians than our population needs. In fact, Alaska has one of 
the smallest numbers of physicians per capita in the country. We need a 
minimum of 500 more doctors just to be at the national average of 
physicians per capita. An American Medical News article recently 
declared Alaska's precarious situation: ``Alaska has long ranked among 
the worst states in terms of physician supply.''
  Our physician shortage crisis will only worsen. There is an expected 
retirement of at least 118 physicians in Anchorage alone in the next 10 
years. In the 1990s, there were 130 new doctors each year. Now that 
figure has dropped to only 31 new physicians since 2001. Outside of 
Anchorage, one in every eight physician positions is vacant.
  Additionally, many physicians are forced out of the Medicare and 
Medicaid programs because reimbursement rates simply do not cover the 
cost to treat those patients. With Alaska's growing population, 
especially of our

[[Page 1072]]

elderly, this shortage will lead to the severe health care access 
crisis for all Alaskans.
  On top of harsh physical challenges, Alaska's rural population also 
faces significant human challenges. These rural patient populations are 
often in the greatest need for primary health care services. Heart 
disease, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases are the leading 
causes of death in Alaska. Women in our state have higher death rates 
from stroke than do women nationally; and mortality among Native 
Alaskan women is dramatically on the rise, whereas, it is actually 
declining among Caucasian women in the Lower 48. The prevalence of 
chronic disease such as diabetes and even tuberculosis is increasing 
faster in Alaska than any other state. Each of these health concerns is 
magnified because access to health care--especially in rural Alaska--
remains our greatest challenge.
  The legislation that I introduce today with Senator Stevens seeks to 
lessen this problem. It will both assist physicians who currently 
practice in rural America and will provide an incentive to encourage 
physicians to practice in these remote and underserved areas. 
Specifically, it would give a physician who is a primary health 
services provider a $1,000 tax credit for each month that he/she 
provides services in a designated ``frontier'' area. Furthermore, 
physicians who treat a high percentage of patients from frontier areas 
would also be eligible for the tax credit.
  My hope is to encourage physicians to practice medicine in rural 
Alaska and throughout rural America. Creating incentives that offset 
the high cost of providing care in the most remote areas of nation will 
go far in recruiting physicians to the areas that are most in need of 
their services.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lott, 
        Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Cochran):
  S. 292. A bill to establish a bipartisan commission on insurance 
reform; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by my 
colleagues and cosponsors Senators Mary Landrieu, Trent Lott, David 
Vitter, and Thad Cochran as we introduce the Commission on Catastrophic 
Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2007.
  As we know all too well, the last few years have brought a 
devastating cycle of natural catastrophes in the United States. In 2004 
and 2005, we witnessed a series of powerful hurricanes that caused 
unthinkable human tragedy and property loss. In my own home State of 
Florida, eight catastrophic storms in 15 months caused more than $31 
billion in insured damages. Now Florida is witnessing skyrocketing 
insurance rates, insurance companies are canceling hundreds of 
thousands of policies, and the State's catastrophe fund is depleted.
  The inability of the private insurance markets to fully handle the 
fallout from these natural disasters has made our Nation's property and 
casualty insurance marketplace unstable. This instability has forced 
the Federal Government to absorb billions of dollars in uninsured 
losses, at a huge cost to all American taxpayers.
  Let me be clear--these issues will not just affect Florida or the 
coastal States. Natural catastrophes can strike anywhere in our 
country. In the few decades, major disasters have been declared in 
almost every State. Congress has struggled with these issues time and 
time again, but nothing much has gotten accomplished. It's time for a 
comprehensive approach to solving our Nation's property and casualty 
insurance issues.
  This bill would create a Federal commission--made up of a group of 
the best experts in the Nation--to quickly recommend to Congress the 
best approach to addressing catastrophic risk insurance. In the 1990s, 
when I was Insurance Commissioner for the State of Florida, I created a 
similar commission, and within months, the commission acted, and many 
of its key recommendations became State law.
  We need a comprehensive approach that will make sure the United 
States is truly prepared for the financial fallout from natural 
disasters. I know this complicated process won't be easy for us--but 
let's roll up our shirtsleeves and get it done.
  Mr. President, 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. 292

       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 ``Commission on Catastrophic 
     Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, which struck the 
     United States in 2005, caused over $200 billion in total 
     economic losses, including insured and uninsured losses.
       (2) Although private sector insurance is currently 
     available to spread some catastrophe-related losses 
     throughout the Nation and internationally, most experts 
     believe there will be significant insurance and reinsurance 
     shortages, resulting in dramatic rate increases for consumers 
     and businesses, and the unavailability of catastrophe 
     insurance.
       (3) The Federal Government has provided and will continue 
     to provide billions of dollars and resources to pay for 
     losses from catastrophes, including hurricanes, volcanic 
     eruptions, tsunamis, tornados, and other disasters, at huge 
     costs to American taxpayers.
       (4) The Federal Government has a critical interest in 
     ensuring appropriate and fiscally responsible risk management 
     of catastrophes. Mortgages require reliable property 
     insurance, and the unavailability of reliable property 
     insurance would make most real estate transactions 
     impossible. In addition, the public health, safety, and 
     welfare demand that structures damaged or destroyed in a 
     catastrophe be reconstructed as soon as possible. Therefore, 
     the inability of the private sector insurance and reinsurance 
     markets to maintain sufficient capacity to enable Americans 
     to obtain property insurance coverage in the private sector 
     endangers the national economy and the public health, safety, 
     and welfare.
       (5) Multiple proposals have been introduced in the United 
     States Congress over the past decade to address catastrophic 
     risk insurance, including the creation of a national 
     catastrophic reinsurance fund and the revision of the Federal 
     tax code to allow insurers to use tax-deferred catastrophe 
     funds, yet Congress has failed to act on any of these 
     proposals.
       (6) To the extent the United States faces high risks from 
     catastrophe exposure, essential technical information on 
     financial structures and innovations in the catastrophe 
     insurance market is needed.
       (7) The most efficient and effective approach to assessing 
     the catastrophe insurance problem in the public policy 
     context is to establish a bipartisan commission of experts to 
     study the management of catastrophic disaster risk, and to 
     require such commission to timely report its recommendations 
     to Congress so that Congress can quickly craft a solution to 
     protect the American people.

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT.

       There is established a bipartisan Commission on 
     Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance (in this Act 
     referred to as the ``Commission'').

     SEC. 4. MEMBERSHIP.

       (a) Members.--The Commission shall be composed of the 
     following:
       (1) The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     or a designee of the Director.
       (2) The Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration or a designee of the 
     Administrator.
       (3) 12 additional members or their designees of whom one 
     shall be--
       (A) a representative of a consumer group;
       (B) a representative of a primary insurance company;
       (C) a representative of a reinsurance company;
       (D) an independent insurance agent with experience in 
     writing property and casualty insurance policies;
       (E) a State insurance regulator;
       (F) a State emergency operations official;
       (G) a scientist;
       (H) a faculty member of an accredited university with 
     experience in risk management;
       (I) a member of nationally recognized think tank with 
     experience in risk management;
       (J) a homebuilder with experience in structural 
     engineering;
       (K) a mortgage lender; and
       (L) a nationally recognized expert in antitrust law.
       (b) Manner of Appointment.--
       (1) In general.--Any member of the Commission described 
     under subsection (a)(3) shall be appointed only upon 
     unanimous agreement of--

[[Page 1073]]

       (A) the majority leader of the Senate;
       (B) the minority leader of the Senate;
       (C) the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and
       (D) the minority leader of the House of Representatives.
       (2) Consultation.--In making any appointment under 
     paragraph (1), each individual described in paragraph (1) 
     shall consult with the President.
       (c) Eligibility Limitation.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (a), no member or officer of the Congress, or 
     other member or officer of the Executive Branch of the United 
     States Government or any State government may be appointed to 
     be a member of the Commission.
       (d) Period of Appointment.--
       (1) In general.--Each member of the Commission shall be 
     appointed for the life of the Commission.
       (2) Vacancies.--A vacancy on the Commission shall not 
     affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as 
     the original appointment was made.
       (e) Quorum.--
       (1) Majority.--A majority of the members of the Commission 
     shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may hold 
     hearings.
       (2) Approval actions.--All recommendations and reports of 
     the Commission required by this Act shall be approved only by 
     a majority vote of a quorum of the Commission.
       (f) Chairperson.--The majority leader of the Senate, the 
     minority leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives, and the minority leader of the House of 
     Representatives shall jointly select 1 member appointed 
     pursuant to subsection (a) to serve as the Chairperson of the 
     Commission.
       (g) Meetings.--The Council shall meet at the call of its 
     Chairperson or a majority of its members at any time.

     SEC. 5. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

       The Commission shall--
       (1) assess--
       (A) the condition of the property and casualty insurance 
     and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes 
     Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, and the 4 major hurricanes 
     that struck the United States in 2004; and
       (B) the ongoing exposure of the United States to 
     earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods; and
       (2) recommend and report, as required under section 6, any 
     necessary legislative and regulatory changes that will--
       (A) improve the domestic and international financial health 
     and competitiveness of such markets; and
       (B) assure consumers of the--
       (i) availability of adequate insurance coverage when an 
     insured event occurs; and
       (ii) best possible range of insurance products at 
     competitive prices.

     SEC. 6. REPORT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     appointment of Commission members under section 4, the 
     Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress a 
     final report containing a detailed statement of its findings, 
     together with any recommendations for legislation or 
     administrative action that the Commission considers 
     appropriate, in accordance with the requirements of section 
     5.
       (b) Considerations.--In developing any recommendations 
     under subsection (a), the Commission shall consider--
       (1) the catastrophic insurance and reinsurance market 
     structures and the relevant commercial practices in such 
     insurance industries in providing insurance protection to 
     different sectors of the American population;
       (2) the constraints and opportunities in implementing a 
     catastrophic insurance system that can resolve key obstacles 
     currently impeding broader implementation of catastrophe risk 
     management and financing with insurance;
       (3) methods to improve risk underwriting practices, 
     including--
       (A) analysis of modalities of risk transfer for potential 
     financial losses;
       (B) assessment of private securitization of insurances 
     risks;
       (C) private-public partnerships to increase insurance 
     capacity in constrained markets; and
       (D) the financial feasibility and sustainability of a 
     national catastrophe pool or regional catastrophe pools 
     designed to provide adequate insurance coverage and increased 
     underwriting capacity to insurers and reinsurers;
       (4) approaches for implementing a public insurance scheme 
     for low-income communities, in order to promote risk 
     reduction and explicit insurance coverage in such 
     communities;
       (5) methods to strengthen insurance regulatory requirements 
     and supervision of such requirements, including solvency for 
     catastrophic risk reserves;
       (6) methods to promote public insurance policies linked to 
     programs for loss reduction in the uninsured sectors of the 
     American population;
       (7) methods to strengthen the risk assessment and 
     enforcement of structural mitigation and vulnerability 
     reduction measures, such as zoning and building code 
     compliance;
       (8) the appropriate role for the Federal Government in 
     stabilizing the property and casualty insurance and 
     reinsurance markets, with an analysis--
       (A) of options such as--
       (i) a reinsurance mechanism;
       (ii) the modernization of Federal taxation policies; and
       (iii) an ``insurance of last resort'' mechanism; and
       (B) how to fund such options; and
       (9) the merits of 3 principle legislative proposals 
     introduced in the 109th Congress, namely:
       (A) The creation of a Federal catastrophe fund to act as a 
     backup to State catastrophe funds (S. 3117);
       (B) Tax-deferred catastrophe accounts for insurers (S. 
     3115); and
       (C) Tax-free catastrophe accounts for policyholders (S. 
     3116).

     SEC. 7. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.

       (a) Hearings.--The Commission or, at the direction of the 
     Commission, any subcommittee or member of the Commission, 
     may, for the purpose of carrying out this Act--
       (1) hold such public hearings in such cities and countries, 
     sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, 
     receive such evidence, and administer such oaths or 
     affirmations as the Commission or such subcommittee or member 
     considers advisable; and
       (2) require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and 
     testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, 
     records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, documents, tapes, 
     and materials as the Commission or such subcommittee or 
     member considers advisable.
       (b) Issuance and Enforcement of Subpoenas.--
       (1) Issuance.--Subpoenas issued under subsection (a) shall 
     bear the signature of the Chairperson of the Commission and 
     shall be served by any person or class of persons designated 
     by the Chairperson for that purpose.
       (2) Enforcement.--In the case of contumacy or failure to 
     obey a subpoena issued under subsection (a), the United 
     States district court for the judicial district in which the 
     subpoenaed person resides, is served, or may be found may 
     issue an order requiring such person to appear at any 
     designated place to testify or to produce documentary or 
     other evidence. Any failure to obey the order of the court 
     may be punished by the court as a contempt of that court.
       (3) Confidentiality.--
       (A) In general.--Information obtained under a subpoena 
     issued under subsection (a) which is deemed confidential, or 
     with reference to which a request for confidential treatment 
     is made by the person furnishing such information--
       (i) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of 
     title 5, United States Code; and
       (ii) shall not be published or disclosed unless the 
     Commission determines that the withholding of such 
     information is contrary to the interest of the United States.
       (B) Exception.--The requirements of subparagraph (A) shall 
     not apply to the publication or disclosure of any data 
     aggregated in a manner that ensures protection of the 
     identity of the person furnishing such data.
       (c) Authority of Members or Agents of the Commission.--Any 
     member or agent of the Commission may, if authorized by the 
     Commission, take any action which the Commission is 
     authorized to take by this Act.
       (d) Obtaining Official Data.--
       (1) Authority.--Notwithstanding any provision of section 
     552a of title 5, United States Code, the Commission may 
     secure directly from any department or agency of the United 
     States any information necessary to enable the Commission to 
     carry out the purposes of this Act.
       (2) Procedure.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the 
     Commission, the head of that department or agency shall 
     furnish the information requested to the Commission.
       (e) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United 
     States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions 
     as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       (f) Administrative Support Services.--Upon the request of 
     the Commission, the Administrator of General Services shall 
     provide to the Commission, on a reimbursable basis, any 
     administrative support services necessary for the Commission 
     to carry out its responsibilities under this Act.
       (g) Gifts.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission may accept, use, and 
     dispose of gifts or donations of services or property.
       (2) Regulations.--The Commission shall adopt internal 
     regulations governing the receipt of gifts or donations of 
     services or property similar to those described in part 2601 
     of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations.

     SEC. 8. COMMISSION PERSONNEL MATTERS.

       (a) Compensation of Members.--Each member of the Commission 
     who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government 
     shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent 
     of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the 
     General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United States 
     Code, for each day (including travel time) during which such 
     member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the 
     Commission. All members of the Commission

[[Page 1074]]

     who are officers or employees of the United States shall 
     serve without compensation in addition to that received for 
     their services as officers or employees of the United States.
       (b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall 
     be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies 
     under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States 
     Code, while away from their homes or regular places of 
     business in the performance of services for the Commission.
       (c) Subcommittees.--The Commission may establish 
     subcommittees and appoint persons to such subcommittees as 
     the Commission considers appropriate.
       (d) Staff.--Subject to such policies as the Commission may 
     prescribe, the Chairperson of the Commission may appoint and 
     fix the pay of such additional personnel as the Chairperson 
     considers appropriate to carry out the duties of the 
     Commission.
       (e) Applicability of Certain Civil Service Laws.--
     Subcommittee members and staff of the Commission may be--
       (1) appointed without regard to the provisions of title 5, 
     United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive 
     service; and
       (2) paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and 
     subchapter III of chapter 53 of that title relating to 
     classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that an 
     individual so appointed may not receive pay in excess of the 
     annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General 
     Schedule under section 5332 of that title.
       (f) Experts and Consultants.--In carrying out its 
     objectives, the Commission may procure temporary and 
     intermittent services of consultants and experts under 
     section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for 
     individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the 
     annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General 
     Schedule under section 5332 of that title.
       (g) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the 
     Chairperson of the Commission, any Federal Government 
     employee may be detailed to the Commission to assist in 
     carrying out the duties of the Commission--
       (1) on a reimbursable basis; and
       (2) such detail shall be without interruption or loss of 
     civil service status or privilege.

     SEC. 9. TERMINATION.

       The Commission shall terminate 60 days after the date on 
     which the Commission submits its report under section 6.

     SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry 
     out the purposes of this Act.

                          ____________________