[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 889-907]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Graham, Mr. Biden, and Mr. 
        Alexander):
  S. 256. A bill to harmonize rate setting standards for copyright 
licenses under section 112 and 114 of title 17, United States Code, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the 
Platform Equality and Remedies for Rights-holders in Music Act along 
with Senators Graham, Biden, and Alexander.
  The need to protect creative works has been an important principle 
recognized in our country since the time when our Constitution was 
first drafted.
  However, the founding fathers could not have predicted the path 
innovation would eventually lead us down, nor the amazing new 
technologies that we now take for granted.
  While many of us still enjoy traditional radio, this too is rapidly 
changing.
  Recently, radio stations have begun advertising for a national 
campaign to switch to High Definition, or HD, radio. This new platform 
is changing the way music is transmitted and, according to its 
promoters, ``radio has never sounded better.''
  In addition, we can now have music radio programs provided not just 
in our cars, or on traditional home stereos, but radio programs have 
expanded to be available through Internet, cable, and satellite music 
stations.
  And radio services are looking to use the new digital transmissions 
and new technologies to change how music is delivered so that the 
audience can not only listen but also record, manipulate, collect and 
create individual music play lists.
  Thus, what was once a passive listening experience has turned into a 
forum where consumers can create their own personalized music 
libraries.
  As the modes of distribution change and the technologies change, so 
must our laws change.
  The government granted a compulsory license for radio-like services 
by Internet, cable, and satellite providers in order to encourage 
competition and the creation of new products.
  However, as new innovations alter these services from a performance 
to a distribution, the law must respond.
  In addition, as the changing technology evolves the distinctions 
between the services become less and less, and the differences in how 
they are treated under the statutory license make less and less sense.
  Therefore, I am introducing a bill that will begin to fix the 
inequities currently in the statute and open the door to further debate 
about additional issues that need to be addressed.
  First, the bill I am introducing today, the PERFORM Act, would create 
rate parity. All companies covered by the government license created in 
section 114 of title 17 would be required to pay a ``fair market 
value'' for use of music libraries rather than having different rate 
standards apply based on what medium is being used to transmit the 
music.
  The bill would also establish content protection. All companies would 
be required to use reasonably available, technologically feasible, and 
economically reasonable means to prevent music theft. In addition, a 
company may not provide a recording device to a customer that would 
allow him or her to create their own personalized music library that 
can be manipulated and maintained without paying a reproduction 
royalty.
  This does not mean such devices cannot be made or distributed. It 
simply means that the business must negotiate the payment for the music 
outside of the statutory license.
  The bill also contains language to make sure that consumers' current 
recording habits are not inhibited. Therefore, any recording the 
consumer chooses to do manually will still be allowed.
  In addition, if the device allows the consumer to manipulate music by 
program, channel, or time period that would still be permitted under 
the statutory license.
  For example, if a listener chooses to automatically record a news 
station every morning at 9:00 a.m.; a jazz station every afternoon at 
2:00 p.m., a blues station every Friday at 3:00 p.m., and a talk radio 
show every Saturday at 4:00 p.m., that would be allowable. In addition, 
that listener could then use their recording device to move these 
programs so that each program of the same genre would be back to back.
  What a listener cannot do is set a recording device to find all the 
Frank Sinatra songs being played on the radio-service and only record 
those songs. By making these distinctions this bill supports new 
business models and technologies without harming the songwriters and 
performers in the process.
  Unfortunately, this bill was unable to move last Congress primarily 
because of misinformation about what the bill does and does not do.
  However, there were also some questions that were raised, not about 
problems with the bill, but about ways to expand its reach. For 
example, currently the bill does not apply to traditional radio 
distributed by the broadcasters. This legislation only covers 
businesses that are under the section 114 license: Internet, cable, and 
satellite. Yet, some of my Republican colleagues argued that the bill 
should apply the same recording limitations to over-the-air 
broadcasters as are applied to Internet, cable, and satellite. While 
this change has not been made in the version of the bill I am 
introducing today, I believe it is an issue we should look at in the 
110th Congress.
  Also, the bill as introduced does not address the other conditions 
applied to Internet, cable, and satellite services in order for them to 
get the benefit of the statutory license. The one that I am most 
concerned with is interactivity.
  I think there is real confusion about what is and what is not allowed 
under the current statute: how much personalization and customization 
may these new services offer?
  Currently, licensing rates are higher for interactive services. 
However, there are clear disagreements as to what constitutes an 
``interactive'' service. I tried to have the parties meet to negotiate 
a solution to this issue so that we could include new language in this 
bill; however, the parties were so far apart that a solution could not 
be reached.
  Despite this, I still believe this is an important issue that must be 
addressed. As introduced, the bill calls for the Copyright Office to 
make recommendations to Congress, but I am hopeful that through the 
process of moving this bill through the Senate we can develop a 
solution sooner rather than rely on a study.
  Finally, some have raised concerns that applying content protection 
to all providers is unfair. They argue that if there is no connection 
between the distributor of the music and the technology provider that 
allows for copying and manipulating of performances then they should 
not be required to protect the music that they broadcast. In general, I 
do not agree. We know that there are websites out there now that 
provide so-called stream-ripping services that allow an individual to 
steal music off an Internet webcast.
  It is not enough to turn a blind eye to this type of piracy and do 
nothing simply because there is no formal connection between the 
businesses. At the same time, I am sympathetic to the concerns that if 
the type of technology a company uses is inadequate or ineffective, 
through no fault of their own, they should not be saddled with huge 
mandatory penalties.
  I am interested in looking at this issue more closely to see if there 
is some way to address this concern and find a compromise solution.
  To be clear, I see this as the beginning of the process. I think this 
legislation is a good step forward in addressing a real problem that is 
occurring in the music industry. Changes or additions may be necessary 
as the bill moves forward, but I believe to wait and do nothing does a 
disservice to all involved.

[[Page 890]]

  Music is an invaluable part of all of our lives. The new technologies 
and changing delivery systems provide exciting new options for all 
consumers. As we continue to move forward into new frontiers we must 
ensure that our laws can stand the test of time.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this 
legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 256

       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 ``Platform Equality and 
     Remedies for Rights Holders in Music Act of 2007'' or the 
     ``Perform Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. RATE SETTING STANDARDS.

       (a) Section 112 Licenses.--Section 112(e)(4) of title 17, 
     United States Code, is amended in the third sentence by 
     striking ``fees that would have been negotiated in the 
     marketplace between a willing buyer and a willing seller'' 
     and inserting ``the fair market value of the rights licensed 
     under this subsection''.
       (b) Section 114 Licenses.--Section 114(f) of title 17, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1);
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), (4), and (5) as 
     paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4), respectively; and
       (3) in paragraph (1) (as redesignated under this 
     subsection)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking all after 
     ``Proceedings'' and inserting ``under chapter 8 shall 
     determine reasonable rates and terms of royalty payments for 
     transmissions during 5-year periods beginning on January 1 of 
     the second year following the year in which the proceedings 
     are to be commenced, except where a different transitional 
     period is provided under section 6(b)(3) of the Copyright 
     Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004, or such other 
     period as the parties may agree.'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) in the first sentence, by striking ``affected by this 
     paragraph'' and inserting ``under this section'';
       (ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``eligible 
     nonsubscription transmission''; and
       (iii) in the third sentence--

       (I) by striking ``eligible nonsubscription services and new 
     subscription''; and
       (II) by striking ``rates and terms that would have been 
     negotiated in the marketplace between a willing buyer and a 
     willing seller'' and inserting ``the fair market value of the 
     rights licensed under this section'';

       (iv) in the fourth sentence, by striking ``base its'' and 
     inserting ``base their'';
       (v) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (vi) in clause (ii), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and'';
       (vii) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
       ``(iii) the degree to which reasonable recording affects 
     the potential market for sound recordings, and the additional 
     fees that are required to be paid by services for 
     compensation.''; and
       (viii) in the matter following clause (ii), by striking 
     ``described in subparagraph (A)''; and
       (C) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(C) The procedures under subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall 
     also be initiated pursuant to a petition filed by any 
     copyright owners of sound recordings or any transmitting 
     entity indicating that a new type of service on which sound 
     recordings are performed is or is about to become 
     operational, for the purpose of determining reasonable terms 
     and rates of royalty payments with respect to such new type 
     of service for the period beginning with the inception of 
     such new type of service and ending on the date on which the 
     royalty rates and terms for preexisting subscription digital 
     audio transmission services, eligible nonsubscription 
     services, or new subscription services, as the case may be, 
     most recently determined under subparagraph (A) or (B) and 
     chapter 8 expire, or such other period as the parties may 
     agree.''.
       (c) Content Protection.--Section 114(d)(2) of title 17, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in clause (ii), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in clause (iii), by adding ``and'' after the semicolon; 
     and
       (C) by adding after clause (iii) the following:
       ``(iv) the transmitting entity takes no affirmative steps 
     to authorize, enable, cause or induce the making of a copy or 
     phonorecord by or for the transmission recipient and uses 
     technology that is reasonably available, technologically 
     feasible, and economically reasonable to prevent the making 
     of copies or phonorecords embodying the transmission in whole 
     or in part, except for reasonable recording as defined in 
     this subsection;'';
       (2) in subparagraph (C)--
       (A) by striking clause (vi); and
       (B) by redesignating clauses (vii) through (ix) as clauses 
     (vi) through (viii), respectively; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:

     ``For purposes of subparagraph (A)(iv), the mere offering of 
     a transmission and accompanying metadata does not in itself 
     authorize, enable, cause, or induce the making of a 
     phonorecord. Nothing shall preclude or prevent a performing 
     rights society or a mechanical rights organization, or any 
     entity owned in whole or in part by, or acting on behalf of, 
     such organizations or entities, from monitoring public 
     performances or other uses of copyrighted works contained in 
     such transmissions. Any such organization or entity shall be 
     granted a license on either a gratuitous basis or for a de 
     minimus fee to cover only the reasonable costs to the 
     licensor of providing the license, and on reasonable, 
     nondiscriminatory terms, to access and retransmit as 
     necessary any content contained in such transmissions 
     protected by content protection or similar technologies, if 
     such licenses are for purposes of carrying out the activities 
     of such organizations or entities in monitoring the public 
     performance or other uses of copyrighted works, and such 
     organizations or entities employ reasonable methods to 
     protect any such content accessed from further 
     distribution.''.
       (d) Definition.--Section 114(j) of title 17, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (15) as 
     paragraphs (11) through (16), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:
       ``(10)(A) A `reasonable recording' means the making of a 
     phonorecord embodying all or part of a performance licensed 
     under this section for private, noncommercial use where 
     technological measures used by the transmitting entity, and 
     which are incorporated into a recording device--
       ``(i) permit automated recording or playback based on 
     specific programs, time periods, or channels as selected by 
     or for the user;
       ``(ii) do not permit automated recording or playback based 
     on specific sound recordings, albums, or artists;
       ``(iii) do not permit the separation of component segments 
     of the copyrighted material contained in the transmission 
     program which results in the playback of a manipulated 
     sequence; and
       ``(iv) do not permit the redistribution, retransmission or 
     other exporting of a phonorecord embodying all or part of a 
     performance licensed under this section from the device by 
     digital outputs or removable media, unless the destination 
     device is part of a secure in-home network that also complies 
     with each of the requirements prescribed in this paragraph.
       ``(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall prevent a consumer 
     from engaging in non-automated manual recording and playback 
     in a manner that is not an infringement of copyright.''.
       (e) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 114.--Section 114(f) of title 17, United States 
     Code (as amended by subsection (b) of this section), is 
     further amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(B), in the first sentence, by striking 
     ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting ``paragraph (2)''; and
       (B) in paragraph (4)(C), by striking ``under paragraph 
     (4)'' and inserting ``under paragraph (3)''.
       (2) Section 804.--Section 804(b)(3)(C) of title 17, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``and 114(f)(2)(C)''; and
       (B) in clause (iv), by striking ``or 114(f)(2)(C), as the 
     case may be''.

     SEC. 3. REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS MEETING AND REPORT.

       (a) Meeting.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Register of Copyrights shall 
     convene a meeting among affected parties to discuss whether 
     to recommend creating a new category of limited interactive 
     services, including an appropriate premium rate for such 
     services, within the statutory license contained in section 
     114 of title 17, United States Code.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the convening of 
     the meeting under subsection (a), the Register of Copyrights 
     shall submit a report on the discussions at that meeting to 
     the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the 
     Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Reid, Mr. 
        Stevens, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. 
        Domenici, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. 
        Lincoln, Mr. Lott, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. 
        Reed, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Specter, and Mrs. Dole):
  S. 259. A bill to authorize the establishment of the Henry Kuualoha 
Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives at the University of Hawaii; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

[[Page 891]]


  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am introducing with my dear friend, the 
senior Senator from Hawaii, Dan Inouye, and several of our colleagues 
from both sides of the aisle, a bill paying tribute to one of this 
body's most loyal servants. The Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial 
Archives bill honors Henry K. Giugni, our former Sergeant-at-Arms of 
the U.S. Senate, through the establishment of cultural and historical 
digital archives. Mr. Giugni would have turned 82 today, if he were 
still alive. These archives will enable the sharing and perpetuation of 
the culture, collective memory, and history of peoples Mr. Giugni so 
dearly loved.
  As many of my colleagues are aware, Henry was a man full of life and 
loyalty who served our country with distinction. He enlisted in the 
U.S. Army at the age of 16 after the attack on Pearl Harbor. During 
World War II he served in combat at the battle of Guadalcanal. 
Following World War II, he continued to serve the State of Hawaii and 
our Nation by working as a police officer and firefighter. After nearly 
a decade of service with Senator Inouye in the Hawaii territorial 
legislature, he came to Washington, DC, as the senior Senator's senior 
executive assistant and then chief of staff for more than 20 years. Mr. 
Giugni was appointed in 1987 to serve as Sergeant-at-Arms of our 
revered body--a position that each of my colleagues and I know as 
crucial to the running of the Senate.
  Henry also sought to tear down barriers in society. In 1965 it was 
Mr. Giugni who represented Senator Inouye's office, and thus the people 
of Hawaii, in the famous 1965 Selma to Montgomery civil rights march 
led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. As Senator Inouye's chief of staff, 
Mr. Giugni served as a vital link between the Senator's office and 
minority groups. He was the first person of color and the first Native 
Hawaiian to be appointed Senate Sergeant-at-Arms. In this influential 
position, he sought out capable minorities and women for promotion to 
ensure that our workforce reflects America. He appointed the first 
minority, an African-American, to lead the Service Department, and was 
the first to assign women to the Capitol Police plainclothes unit. 
Because of his concern about people with disabilities, Mr. Giugni 
enacted a major expansion of the Special Services Office, which now 
conducts tours of the U.S. Capitol for the blind, deaf, and wheelchair-
bound, and publishes Senate maps and documents in Braille.
  Further in his capacity as Sergeant-at-Arms, Henry was the chief law 
enforcement officer of the U.S. Senate and an able manager of a 
majority of the Senate's support services. He oversaw a budget of 
nearly $120 million and approximately 2,000 employees. As Sergeant-at-
Arms, Mr. Giugni presided over the inauguration of President George 
H.W. Bush, and escorted numerous dignitaries on their visits to the 
U.S. Capitol, including Nelson Mandela, Margaret Thatcher, and Vaclav 
Havel.
  Establishing the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Memorial Archives would be a 
poignant and appropriate way to honor our loyal friend, colleague, and 
fellow American, as well as his dear wife Lani, who recently followed 
him to the great beyond. Henry lived a life full of rich experiences, 
and along the way he accumulated a wealth of wisdom. His memory and 
spirit live on, but it is essential we perpetuate his wisdom and 
experiences, and those of others like him, so what was learned and 
accomplished will not be lost to future generations. This is the 
primary impetus behind creating these archives. There is a dearth of 
physical archives, museums, or libraries devoted to preserving and 
perpetuating the history, culture, achievements and collective 
narratives of indigenous peoples. As one generation passes, a wealth of 
traditional knowledge could be lost forever. Establishing these 
archives to perpetuate the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples 
such as Henry will ensure that future generations have access to that 
widsom and, in a sense, will be able to learn from the original sources 
themselves.
  The development of the Internet in managing knowledge in electronic 
format has enabled the most pervasive storing and sharing of 
information the world has ever seen. Electronic, digital archives would 
facilitate the sharing, preservation and perpetuation of the unique 
native culture, language, tradition and history. These archives will be 
a source of enduring knowledge, accessible to all. It will help to 
ensure that the children of today and tomorrow will not be deprived of 
the rich culture, history and collective knowledge of indigenous 
peoples. These archives will help to guarantee that the experiences, 
wisdom and knowledge of kupuna, or elders such as Henry, will not be 
lost to future generations.
  The first section of the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Memorial Archives bill 
authorizes a grant awarded to the University of Hawaii's Academy for 
Creative Media for the establishment, maintenance and update of the 
archives which are to be located at the University of Hawaii. These 
funds would be used to enable a statewide archival effort which will 
include the acquisition of a secure, web-accessible repository that 
will house significant historical and cultural information. This 
information may include oral histories, collective narratives, 
photographs, video files, journals, creative works and documentation of 
practices and customs such as traditional dance and traditional music 
that were used to convey historical and cultural knowledge in the 
absence of written language. The funds will enable this important 
effort by assisting in the purchasing of equipment, hiring of 
personnel, and establishment of space for the collection and transfer 
of media, housing the archives, and creating this in-depth database.
  The second section of this bill authorizes the use of these grant 
funds for several different educational activities, many of which are 
intended to magnify the resourcefulness of these archives and benefit 
the student populations who will likely access the archives the most. 
This includes the development of educational materials from the 
archives that can be used in teaching indigenous students. Despite 
their focus, these materials are meant to enhance the education of all 
students, even students from non-native backgrounds. This also includes 
developing outreach initiatives to introduce the archives to elementary 
and secondary schools, and as enabling schools to access the archives 
through the computer.
  Grant funds would also be available to help make a college education 
possible for students who otherwise could not independently afford such 
an education through scholarship awards. Additionally, funds can be 
used to address the problem of cultural incongruence in teaching, an 
issue that impedes effective learning in our Nation's classrooms. Such 
a lack of congruence exists in a wide range of situations, from rural 
and underserved communities in remote areas to well-populated urban 
centers, from my State of Hawaii to areas on the eastern seaboard. The 
dynamic I am describing exists along lines of race and ethnicity, 
socioeconomic strata, age, and many other vectors, which can muddy the 
effective transmission of knowledge. Many of us, especially those from 
rural, indigenous, or ethnic minority backgrounds, including Henry 
Giugni, have experienced barriers to learning as we have worked our way 
through the education system. This bill seeks to improve student 
achievement by addressing cultural incongruence between teachers and 
the student population. This will be accomplished by providing 
professional development training to teachers, enabling them to better 
communicate with their students.
  Finally, as financial illiteracy is a growing problem, especially 
among college age youth who are exposed to a variety of financial 
products, funds can be used to increase the economic and financial 
literacy of college students. This will be accomplished through the 
propagation of proven best practices that have resulted in positive 
behavioral change in regards to improved debt and credit management, 
and economic decision making. Such activities can help to ensure that 
students stay in school, graduate in a better financial position, and 
remain disciplined in

[[Page 892]]

effectively managing their finances throughout their working and 
retirement years.
  Henry K. Giugni served among us with distinction and honor. I am very 
grateful to have known him and his family. I encourage all of my 
colleagues to perpetuate his memory by supporting the Henry Kuualoha 
Giugni Memorial Archives bill. These archives are the most fitting way 
we can honor and remember our friend and dear public servant, Henry 
Kuualoha Giugni.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record and that support letters from University of Hawaii President 
David McClain and Academy for Creative Media Director Christopher Lee 
also be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 259

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

     SECTION 1. HENRY KUUALOHA GIUGNI KUPUNA MEMORIAL ARCHIVES.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary of Education is 
     authorized to award a grant to the University of Hawaii 
     Academy for Creative Media for the establishment, 
     maintenance, and periodic modernization of the Henry Kuualoha 
     Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives at the University of Hawaii.
       (b) Use of Funds.--The Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna 
     Memorial Archives shall use the grant funds received under 
     this section--
       (1) to facilitate the acquisition of a secure web 
     accessible repository of Native Hawaiian historical data rich 
     in ethnic and cultural significance to our Nation for 
     preservation and access by future generations;
       (2) to award scholarships to facilitate access to a college 
     education for students who can not independently afford such 
     education;
       (3) to support programmatic efforts associated with the 
     web-based media projects of the archives;
       (4) to create educational materials, from the contents of 
     the archives, that are applicable to a broad range of 
     indigenous students such as Native Hawaiians, Alaskan 
     Natives, and Native American Indians;
       (5) to develop outreach initiatives that introduce the 
     archival collections to elementary schools and secondary 
     schools;
       (6) to develop supplemental web-based resources that define 
     terms and cultural practices innate to Native Hawaiians;
       (7) to rent, lease, purchase, maintain, or repair 
     educational facilities to house the archival collections;
       (8) to rent, lease, purchase, maintain, or repair computer 
     equipment for use by elementary schools and secondary schools 
     in accessing the archival collections;
       (9) to provide pre-service and in-service teacher training 
     to develop a core group of kindergarten through grade 12 
     teachers who are able to provide instruction in a way that is 
     culturally congruent with the learning modalities of the 
     kindergarten, elementary school, or secondary school students 
     the teachers are teaching, particularly indigenous students 
     such as Native Hawaiians, Alaskan Natives, and Native 
     American Indians, in order to--
       (A) ameliorate the lack of cultural congruence between the 
     teachers and the students the teachers teach; and
       (B) improve student achievement; and
       (10) to increase the economic and financial literacy of 
     college students through the proliferation of proven best 
     practices used at other institutions of higher education that 
     result in positive behavioral change toward improved debt and 
     credit management and economic decision making.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2007, $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and such 
     sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 
     through 2012.
                                  ____



                                        University of Hawai`i,

                                     Honolulu, HI, August 3, 2006.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senator, State of Hawai`i, Hart Senate Office Building, 
         Washington DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: The University of Hawai`i is proud to 
     support the establishment of the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna 
     Memorial Archives as detailed in the Senate Bill reviewed 
     with your staff during my June 2006 visit to Washington, D.C. 
     As you know, Henry Giugni was a great friend of the 
     University of Hawai`i. We were honored to be able to award 
     him an Honorary Doctorate in Humane Letters from the 
     University of Hawai`i in 2003.
       Please add the University of Hawai`i to the growing list of 
     many friends and congressional co-sponsors who have joined 
     with you and Senator Inouye to pay appropriate tribute to a 
     great Hawaiian and a worthy advocate for minorities in 
     government--Henry Kuualoha Giugni. Thank you for this 
     opportunity to express our support for one who was so 
     important to our University `ohana.
           With best wishes and Aloha,
                                                    David McClain,
     President.
                                  ____

                                            University of Hawai`i,


                                   Academy for Creative Media,

                                    Honolulu, HI, August 21, 2006.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senator, State of Hawai`i, Hart Senate Office Building 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: The Academy for Creative Media at the 
     University of Hawai`i at Manoa is proud to support, and 
     honored to be designated as the primary home for the 
     establishment of the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial 
     Archives.
       As you know, there is an exciting visual history of Hawai`i 
     that has yet to be collected, documented and archived for the 
     benefit of historians, teachers, students, and all people who 
     embrace the Spirit of Aloha. This is a people's history and 
     archive that will tap deeply into the diversity and 
     multiculturalism of our state.
       Unfortunately, much of this rich treasure of moving images 
     on film and video tape is deteriorating with age and cries 
     out to be permanently preserved in a digital archive where it 
     can be readily and interactively accessed by all.
       The establishment of the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna 
     Memorial Archives will enable the creation of a plethora of 
     illustrated oral histories of our beloved elders, create 
     educational programs which can be used to bridge 
     intercultural gaps while embracing an ever wider 
     multicultural society, and empower new generations by 
     grounding them in the richness of values, as reflected by Mr. 
     Giugni, that has defined Hawai'i as the Aloha State.
       The Academy for Creative Media stands ready to make this 
     Archive a primary educational center and resource, a living 
     tribute to Henry Kuualoha Giugni and the people of Hawai`i.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Christopher Lee,
                                                         Director.

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I join my partner from Hawaii, 
Senator Akaka, and other esteemed colleagues, in lending my support to 
the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives Bill. I offer my 
support today, on this, the eleventh day of January, Henry's birthday, 
to herald the significant role that the establishment of these archives 
will play in shaping the future of a new generation of Americans, just 
as Henry did during his remarkable tenure as the 30th Sergeant-at-Arms 
of the United States Senate.
  In addition to creating a digital archive and preserving the 
traditions and culture of Native Hawaiians, this bill will support 
initiatives critical to the development of Web-based media projects and 
the creation of educational materials that will richly enhance the 
educational experience for countless students.
  It is my hope that the establishment of these archives will inspire 
greater academic achievement of indigenous students by sharing with 
them the stories and histories of accomplished individuals with 
indigenous backgrounds, such as Henry.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 260. A bill to establish the Fort Stanton-Snowy River Cave 
National Conservation Area; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
protect a natural wonder in my home State of New Mexico. A passage 
within the Fort Stanton Cave contains what can only be described as a 
magnificent white river of calcite. I am pleased to be joined in this 
effort again this year by my colleague from New Mexico, Senator 
Bingaman.
  Many locals are familiar with the Fort Stanton Cave in Lincoln 
County, NM. Exploration of the cave dates back to at least the 1850s, 
when troops stationed in the area began visiting the network of 
caverns. Exploration continued over the years and in 2001 BLM 
volunteers discovered a two-mile long continuous calcite formation.
  We have not found a formation of this size anywhere else in New 
Mexico or perhaps even in the United States. Because of the beauty and 
distinct appearance of this discovery, I continue to be excited about 
the scientific and educational opportunities associated with the find. 
This large, continuous stretch of calcite may yield valuable research 
opportunities relating to hydrology, geology, and microbiology. In 
fact, there may be no limits to what we can learn from this snow white 
cave passage.
  It is not often that we find something so striking and so 
significant. I believe

[[Page 893]]

this find is worthy of study and our most thoughtful management and 
conservation.
  My legislation does the following: (1) creates a Fort Stanton-Snowy 
River Cave Conservation Area to protect, secure and conserve the 
natural and unique features of the Snowy River Cave; (2) instructs the 
BLM to prepare a map and legal description of the Snowy River cave, and 
to develop a comprehensive, long-term management plan for the cave 
area; (3) authorizes the conservation of the unique features and 
environs in the cave for scientific, educational and other public uses 
deemed safe and appropriate under the management plan; (4) authorizes 
the BLM to work with State and other institutions and to cooperate with 
Lincoln County to address the historical involvement of the local 
community; (5) protects the caves from mineral and mining leasing 
operations.
  As the people of my home State of New Mexico know, we have many 
natural wonders, and I am proud to play a role in the protection of 
this recent unique discovery. I hope my colleagues will join with me in 
approving the Fort Stanton-Snowy River National Cave Conservation Area 
Act.
  I ask unanimous consent that 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. 260

       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 ``Fort Stanton-Snowy River 
     Cave National Conservation Area Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Conservation area.--The term ``Conservation Area'' 
     means the Fort Stanton-Snowy River Cave National Conservation 
     Area established by section 3(a).
       (2) Management plan.--The term ``management plan'' means 
     the management plan developed for the Conservation Area under 
     section 4(c).
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau of 
     Land Management.

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF FORT STANTON-SNOWY RIVER CAVE 
                   NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA.

       (a) Establishment; Purposes.--There is established the Fort 
     Stanton-Snowy River Cave National Conservation Area in 
     Lincoln County, New Mexico, to protect, conserve, and enhance 
     the unique and nationally important historic, cultural, 
     scientific, archaeological, natural, and educational 
     subterranean cave resources of the Fort Stanton-Snowy River 
     cave system.
       (b) Area Included.--The Conservation Area shall include the 
     area within the boundaries depicted on the map entitled 
     ``Fort Stanton-Snowy River Cave National Conservation Area'' 
     and dated November 2005.
       (c) Map and Legal Description.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a map and legal description of the Conservation Area.
       (2) Effect.--The map and legal description of the 
     Conservation Area shall have the same force and effect as if 
     included in this Act, except that the Secretary may correct 
     any minor errors in the map and legal description.
       (3) Public availability.--The map and legal description of 
     the Conservation Area shall be available for public 
     inspection in the appropriate offices of the Bureau of Land 
     Management.

     SEC. 4. MANAGEMENT OF THE CONSERVATION AREA.

       (a) Management.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall manage the 
     Conservation Area--
       (A) in a manner that conserves, protects, and enhances the 
     resources and values of the Conservation Area, including the 
     resources and values described in section 3(a); and
       (B) in accordance with--
       (i) this Act;
       (ii) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 
     U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); and
       (iii) any other applicable laws.
       (2) Uses.--The Secretary shall only allow uses of the 
     Conservation Area that are consistent with the protection of 
     the cave resources.
       (3) Requirements.--In administering the Conservation Area, 
     the Secretary shall provide for--
       (A) the conservation and protection of the natural and 
     unique features and environs for scientific, educational, and 
     other appropriate public uses of the Conservation Area;
       (B) public access, as appropriate, while providing for the 
     protection of the cave resources and for public safety;
       (C) the continuation of other existing uses or other new 
     uses of the Conservation Area that do not impair the purposes 
     for which the Conservation Area is established;
       (D) management of the surface area of the Conservation Area 
     in accordance with the Fort Stanton Area of Critical 
     Environmental Concern Final Activity Plan dated March, 2001, 
     or any amendments to the plan, consistent with this Act; and
       (E) scientific investigation and research opportunities 
     within the Conservation Area, including through partnerships 
     with colleges, universities, schools, scientific 
     institutions, researchers, and scientists to conduct research 
     and provide educational and interpretive services within the 
     Conservation Area.
       (b) Withdrawals.--Subject to valid existing rights, all 
     Federal surface and subsurface land within the Conservation 
     Area and all land and interests in the land that are acquired 
     by the United States after the date of enactment of this Act 
     for inclusion in the Conservation Area, are withdrawn from--
       (1) all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under 
     the general land laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) operation under the mineral leasing and geothermal 
     leasing laws.
       (c) Management Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop a 
     comprehensive plan for the long-term management of the 
     Conservation Area.
       (2) Purposes.--The management plan shall--
       (A) describe the appropriate uses and management of the 
     Conservation Area;
       (B) incorporate, as appropriate, decisions contained in any 
     other management or activity plan for the land within or 
     adjacent to the Conservation Area;
       (C) take into consideration any information developed in 
     studies of the land and resources within or adjacent to the 
     Conservation Area; and
       (D) provide for a cooperative agreement with Lincoln 
     County, New Mexico, to address the historical involvement of 
     the local community in the interpretation and protection of 
     the resources of the Conservation Area.
       (d) Activities Outside Conservation Area.--The 
     establishment of the Conservation Area shall not--
       (1) create a protective perimeter or buffer zone around the 
     Conservation Area; or
       (2) preclude uses or activities outside the Conservation 
     Area that are permitted under other applicable laws, even if 
     the uses or activities are prohibited within the Conservation 
     Area.
       (e) Research and Interpretive Facilities.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may establish facilities 
     for--
       (A) the conduct of scientific research; and
       (B) the interpretation of the historical, cultural, 
     scientific, archaeological, natural, and educational 
     resources of the Conservation Area.
       (2) Cooperative agreements.--The Secretary may, in a manner 
     consistent with this Act, enter into cooperative agreements 
     with the State of New Mexico and other institutions and 
     organizations to carry out the purposes of this Act.
       (f) Water Rights.--Nothing in this Act constitutes an 
     express or implied reservation of any water right.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act. To establish the Fort 
     Stanton-Snowy River Cave National Conservation Area.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. English, Mr. Specter, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Allard, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Levin, Ms. Collins, Mr. 
        Kyl, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 261. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to strengthen 
prohibitions against animal fighting, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleagues, 
Senators Specter and Ensign, in reintroducing the Animal Fighting 
Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007. This legislation has won the 
unanimous approval of the Senate several times, but unfortunately has 
not yet reached the finish line. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to see this important bill finally become the law of the 
land.
  There is no doubt, animal fighting is terribly cruel. Dogs and 
roosters are drugged to make them hyper-aggressive and forced to keep 
fighting even after suffering severe injuries such as punctured eyes 
and pierced lungs.
  It's all done for ``entertainment'' and illegal gambling. Children 
are sometimes brought to these spectacles, and the fights are 
frequently accompanied by illegal drug trafficking and acts of human 
violence. In 2006, nine murders

[[Page 894]]

related to animal fighting occurred across the country.
  Some dogfighters steal pets to use as bait for training their dogs, 
while others allow trained fighting dogs to roam neighborhoods and 
endanger the public.
  The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act will strengthen 
current law by making the interstate transport of animals for the 
purpose of fighting a felony and increase the punishment to three years 
of jail time. This is necessary because the current misdemeanor penalty 
has proven ineffective--considered a ``cost of doing business'' by 
those in the animal fighting industry which continues unabated 
nationwide. These enterprises depend on interstate commerce, as I 
evidenced by the animal fighting magazines that advertise and promote 
them.
  Our bill also makes it a felony to move cockfighting implements in 
interstate or foreign commerce. These are razor-sharp knives known as 
``slashers'' and ice pick-like gaffs designed exclusively for 
cockfights and attached to the birds' legs for fighting. Cockfighting 
magazines I and websites contain hundreds of advertisements for mail-
order knives and gaffs, revealing a thriving interstate market for the 
weapons used in cockfights.
  This is long overdue legislation. Both the Senate and House approved 
felony animal fighting provisions in their Farm Bills in 2001, but they 
were stripped out in conference. The Senate included felony animal 
fighting provisions in the 2003 Health Forest Bill, but they were again 
dropped in conference. In September 2004, the Animal Fighting 
Prohibition Enforcement Act was approved by the House Judiciary 
Committee, but did not reach the floor. In April 2005, the Senate 
passed a bill nearly identical to the one we are introducing today, 
when it unanimously approved S. 382. In May 2006, the House Crime, 
Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee held a comprehensive 
hearing on the House companion bill, H.R. 817, which garnered 324 
cosponsors but was not considered on the House floor. The legislative 
history of this animal fighting felony legislation shows it has broad 
bipartisan support of more than half the Senate, and it has won 
unanimous approval on the floor time and time again.
  It's time to get this felony animal fighting language enacted. With 
the bird flu threat looming, we can't afford to wait any longer. The 
economic consequences are staggering--the World Bank projects worldwide 
losses of $1.5 to $2 trillion. We must be able to say we did all we 
could to prevent such a pandemic, and this is an obvious, easy and 
necessary step.
  Interstate and international transport of birds for cockfighting is 
known to have contributed to the spread of avian influenza in Asia and 
poses a threat to poultry and public health in the United States. 
According to the World Health Organization and local news reports, at 
least nine confirmed human fatalities from avian influenza in Thailand 
and Vietnam may have been contracted through cockfighting activity 
since the beginning of 2004. Several children are among those who are 
reported to have died from avian influenza as a result of exposure 
through cockfighting, including 4-year-old, 6-year-old, and 18-year-old 
boys in Thailand and a 6-year-old girl in Vietnam.
  There have been many news stories focusing on the connection between 
bird flu and cockfighting. For example, an MSNBC report headlined, 
``Cock-fights blamed for Thailand bird flu spread.'' A World Health 
Organization Asia regional spokesperson interviewed recently on the CBS 
Evening News described the risk of spreading disease through 
cockfighting with infected animals as a ``total disaster waiting to 
happen.''
  Because human handling of fighting roosters is a regular occurrence, 
the opportunity of disease transmission from fighting birds to people 
is substantial. Fighting-bird handlers come into frequent, sustained 
contact with their birds during training and during organized fights. 
It is common practice for handlers to suck saliva and blood from 
roosters' beaks to help clear their airways and enable them to keep 
fighting.
  Cockfighters frequently move birds across State and foreign borders, 
bringing them to fight in different locations and risking the spread of 
infectious diseases. Communications in national cockfighting magazines 
and websites have shown that U.S. cockfighters regularly transport 
their birds to and from other parts of the world, including Asia.
  The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), in endorsing the Animal 
Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act, noted that strengthening current 
Federal law on the inhumane practice of animal fighting would enhance 
the agency's ability to safeguard the health of U.S. poultry against 
deadly diseases such as avian influenza and exotic Newcastle disease 
(END). The USDA has stated that cockfighting was implicated in an 
outbreak of END that spread through California and the Southwest in 
2002 and 2003. That outbreak cost U.S. taxpayers nearly $200 million to 
eradicate and cost the U.S. poultry industry many millions more in lost 
export markets. The costs of an avian influenza outbreak in this 
country could be much higher--with the Congressional Budget Office 
estimating losses between 1.5 and 5 percent of GDP ($185 billion to 
$618 billion).
  The National Chicken Council, which represents 95 percent of all U.S. 
poultry producers and processors, has also endorsed the Animal Fighting 
Prohibition Enforcement Act, expressing concern that avian influenza 
and other diseases can be spread by the movement of game birds and that 
the commercial chicken industry remains under considerable threat 
because it operates amidst a national network of game bird operations.
  Avian influenza has not yet crossed the species barrier in this 
country, as it has in Asia. But we must do all we can to minimize this 
risk. Establishing a more meaningful deterrent to illegal interstate 
and foreign movement of animals for fighting purposes is an obvious 
step we can take to reduce this risk.
  Besides those associated with the poultry industry, this legislation 
has been endorsed by a number of other organization including the 
Humane Society of the United States, the American Veterinary Medical 
Association, the National Coalition Against Gambling Expansion, the 
League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Sheriffs' 
Association, and more than 400 individual sheriffs and police 
departments covering every State in the country. Those law enforcement 
agencies recognize that animal fighting often involves the movement of 
animals across State and foreign borders, so they can't do the job on 
their own. They need the Federal Government to do its part to help curb 
this dangerous activity.
  Our legislation does not expand the federal government's reach into a 
new area, but simply aims to make current law more effective. It is 
explicitly limited to interstate and foreign commerce, so it protects 
States' rights in the two States where cockfighting is still allowed, 
and it protects States' rights the other 48 States--and all 50, for 
dogfighting--where weak Federal law is compromising their ability to 
keep animal fighting outside their borders.
  The bill we introduce today is identical to S. 382, which passed the 
Senate unanimously in the last Congress, except for one change. The new 
bill provides for up to three years' jail time, compared to two in S. 
382, in order to bring this more in line with penalties for other 
federal animal cruelty-related felonies. For example, in 1999, Congress 
authorized imprisonment of up to 5 years for interstate commerce in 
videos depicting animal cruelty, including animal fighting, P.L. 106-
152, and mandatory jail time of up to 10 years for willfully harming or 
killing a federal police dog or horse (P.L. 106-254).
  With every week, there are new reports of animal fighting busts, as 
local and state law enforcement struggle to rein in this thriving 
industry. In my own State of Washington, police arrested 5 people on 
Christmas Day at a cockfight in Brewster, and about 50 people ran off, 
according to recent

[[Page 895]]

news accounts. Three days later, six more were arrested in Okanogan for 
promoting cockfighting. And nine people were arrested in Tacoma last 
spring, where investigators seized methamphetamines, marijuana, 
weapons, thousands of dollars, and fighting roosters.
  It's time for Congress to strengthen the federal law so that it can 
provide as a meaningful deterrent against animal fighting. State and 
local law enforcement will have a tough law on the books necessary to 
help them crack down on this interstate industry. I thank my colleagues 
for their support, and look forward to working with them to finally 
enacting this common-sense measure into law.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Reid, Mrs. 
        Feinstein, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Murray, and Ms. 
        Cantwell)
  S. 267. A bill to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 
Act of 1968 to clarify that territories and Indian tribes are eligible 
to receive grants for confronting the use of methamphetamine; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Native 
American Methamphetamine Enforcement and Treatment Act of 2007.
  Unfortunately, when Congress passed the Combat Methamphetamine 
Epidemic Act, tribes were unintentionally left out as eligible 
applicants in some of the newly-authorized grant programs. The bill I 
am introducing today, along with Senators Smith, Reid, Baucus, 
Feinstein, Boxer, Feingold, Cantwell, and Murray, would simply ensure 
that tribes are able to apply for these funds and give Native American 
communities the resources they need to fight scourge of methamphetamine 
use.
  The recently-enacted Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005 
authorized new funding for three grant programs. The Act authorized $99 
million in new funding for the COPS Hot Spots program, which helps 
local law enforcement agencies obtain the tools they need to reduce the 
production, distribution, and use of meth. Funding may also be used to 
clean up meth labs, support health and environmental agencies, and to 
purchase equipment and support systems.
  The Act also authorized $20 million for a Drug-Endangered Children 
grant program to provide comprehensive services to assist children who 
live in a home in which meth has been used, manufactured, or sold. 
Under this program, law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, child 
protective services, social services, and health care services, work 
together to ensure that these children get the help they need.
  In addition, the Combat Meth Act authorized grants to be made to 
address the use of meth among pregnant and parenting women offenders. 
The Pregnant and Parenting Offenders program is aimed at facilitating 
collaboration between the criminal justice, child welfare, and State 
substance abuse systems in order to reduce the use of drugs by pregnant 
women and those with dependent children.
  Although Tribes are eligible applicants under the Pregnant and 
Parenting Offenders program, they were not included as eligible 
applicants under either the Hot Spots program or the Drug-Endangered 
Children program. I see no reason why tribes should not be able to 
access all of these funds.
  Meth use has had a devastating impact in communities throughout the 
country, and Indian Country is no exception. According to NCAI, Native 
Americans have the highest meth abuse rate among any ethnic group and 
70 percent of law enforcement rate meth as their greatest challenge--
indeed, a FBI survey found that an estimated 40 percent of violent 
crime in Indian Country was related to meth use. And last year there 
was an article in the Gallup Independent newspaper about a Navajo 
grandmother, her daughter, and granddaughter, who were all arrested for 
selling meth. There was also a one-year-old child in the home when 
police executed the arrest warrant. It is absolutely disheartening to 
hear about cases such as this, with three generations of a family 
destroyed by meth.
  I strongly believe that we need to do everything we can to assist 
communities as they struggle to deal with the consequences of meth, and 
ensuring that Native American communities are able to access these 
funds is an important first step. I hope my colleagues will join me in 
supporting this important measure.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Lott, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Chambliss, 
        and Ms. Collins):
  S. 269. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 
and permanently extend the expensing of certain depreciable business 
assets for small businesses; to the Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mrs. Lincoln):
  S. 270. A bill to permit startup partnerships and S corporations to 
elect taxable years other than required years; to the Committee on 
Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Hutchison, and Mr. 
        Kerry):
  S. 271. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a shorter recovery period for the depreciation of certain improvements 
to retail space; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a series of 
proposals that, once enacted, will reduce not only the amount of taxes 
that small businesses pay, but also the administrative burdens which 
saddle small companies trying to comply with the tax laws. Small 
businesses are the engine that drives our Nation's economy and I 
believe these proposals strengthen their ability to lead the way. I am 
pleased to be joined by colleagues from both sides of the aisle as we 
work to move these important initiatives for small businesses from 
legislation to law.
  A top priority I hear from small businesses across Maine is the need 
for tax relief. Despite the fact that small businesses are the real 
job-creators for Maine's and our Nation's economy, the current tax 
system is placing an entirely unreasonable burden on them when trying 
to satisfy their tax obligations. The current tax code imposes a large, 
and expensive, burden on all taxpayers in terms of satisfying their 
reporting and record-keeping obligations. The problem, though, is that 
small companies are disadvantaged most in terms of the money and time 
spent in satisfying their tax obligation.
  For example, according to the Small Business Administration's Office 
of Advocacy, small businesses spend an astounding 8 billion hours each 
year complying with government reports. They also spend more than 80 
percent of this time on completing tax forms. What's even more 
troubling is that companies that employ fewer than 20 employees spend 
nearly $1,304 per employee in tax compliance costs; an amount that is 
nearly 67 percent more than larger firms.
  For that reason, I am introducing a package of proposals that will 
provide not only targeted, affordable tax relief to small business 
owners, but also simpler rules under the tax code. By simplifying the 
tax code, small business owners will be able to satisfy their tax 
obligation in a cheaper, more efficient manner, allowing them to be 
able to devote more time and resources to their business.
  I am introducing legislation today in response to the repeated 
requests from small businesses in Maine and from across the nation to 
allow them to expense more of their investments, like the purchase of 
essential new equipment. My bill modifies the Internal Revenue Code by 
doubling the amount a small business can expense from $100,000 to 
$200,000, and make the provision permanent as President Bush proposed 
this change in his fiscal year 2007 tax proposals. With small 
businesses representing 99 percent of all employers, creating 75 
percent new jobs and contributing 51 percent of private-sector output, 
their size is the only `small' aspect about them.
  By doubling and making permanent the current expensing limit and 
indexing these amounts for inflation, this

[[Page 896]]

bill will achieve two important objectives. First, qualifying 
businesses will be able to write off more of the equipment purchases 
today, instead of waiting five, seven or more years to recover their 
costs through depreciation. That represents substantial savings both in 
dollars and in the time small businesses would otherwise have to spend 
complying with complex and confusing depreciation rules. Moreover, new 
equipment will contribute to continued productivity growth in the 
business community, which economic experts have repeatedly stressed is 
essential to the long-term vitality of our economy.
  Second, as a result of this bill, more businesses will qualify for 
this benefit because the phase-out limit will be increased to $800,000 
in new assets purchases. At the same time, small business capital 
investment will be pumping more money into the economy. This is a win-
win for small business and the economy as a whole and I am please to 
have Senators Lott, Isakson, Chambliss, and Collins join me as 
cosponsors of this legislation.
  Another proposal that I am introducing with Senator Lincoln, the 
Small Business Tax Flexibility Act of 2007, will permit start-up small 
business owners to use a taxable year other than the calendar year if 
they generally earn fewer than $5 million during the tax year.
  Specifically, the Small Business Tax Flexibility Act of 2007 will 
permit more taxpayers to use the taxable year most suitable to their 
business cycle. Until 1986, businesses could elect the taxable year-end 
that made the most economic sense for the business. In 1986, Congress 
passed legislation requiring partnerships and S corporations, many of 
which are small businesses, to adopt a December 31 year-end. The tax 
code does provide alternatives to the calendar year for small 
businesses, but the compliance costs and administrative burdens 
associated with these alternatives prove to be too high for most small 
businesses to utilize.
  Meanwhile, C corporations, as large corporations often are, receive 
much more flexibility in their choice of taxable year. A C corporation 
can adopt either a calendar year or any fiscal year for tax purposes, 
as along as it keeps its books on that basis. This creates the unfair 
result of allowing larger businesses with greater resources greater 
flexibility in choosing a taxable year than smaller firms with fewer 
resources. This simply does not make sense to me. My bill changes these 
existing rules so that more small businesses will be able to use the 
taxable year that best suits their business.
  To provide relief and equity to our nation's 1.5 million retail 
establishments, most of which have less than five employees, I am 
introducing a bill with Senators Lincoln, Hutchison, and Kerry that 
reduces from 39 to 15 years the depreciable life of improvements that 
are made to retail stores that are owned by the retailer. Under current 
law, only retailers that lease their property are allowed this 
accelerated depreciation, which means it excludes retailers that also 
own the property in which they operate. My bill simply seeks to provide 
equal treatment to all retailers.
  Specifically, this bill will simply conform the tax codes to the 
realities that retailers on Main Street face. Studies conducted by the 
Treasury Department, Congressional Research Service and private 
economists have all found that the 39-year depreciation life for 
buildings is too long and that the 39-year depreciation life for 
building improvements is even worse. Retailers generally remodel their 
stores every five to seven years to reflect changes in customer base 
and compete with newer stores. Moreover, many improvements such as 
interior partitions, ceiling tiles, restroom accessories, and paint, 
may only last a few years before requiring replacement.
  This package of proposals are a tremendous opportunity to help small 
enterprises succeed by providing an incentive for reinvestment and 
leaving them more of their earnings to do just that. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in supporting these proposals.
  I ask unanimous consent that the the text of these 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. 269

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

     SECTION 1. INCREASE AND PERMANENT EXTENSION FOR EXPENSING FOR 
                   SMALL BUSINESS.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 179(b) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to dollar limitation) 
     is amended by striking ``$25,000 ($100,000 in the case of 
     taxable years beginning after 2002 and before 2010)'' and 
     inserting ``$200,000''.
       (b) Increase in Qualifying Investment at Which Phaseout 
     Begins.--Paragraph (2) of section 179(b) of such Code 
     (relating to reduction in limitation) is amended by striking 
     ``$200,000 ($400,000 in the case of taxable years beginning 
     after 2002 and before 2010)'' and inserting ``$800,000''.
       (c) Inflation Adjustments.--Section 179(b)(5)(A) of such 
     Code (relating to inflation adjustments) is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding clause (i)--
       (A) by striking ``after 2003 and before 2010'' and 
     inserting ``after 2007'', and
       (B) by striking ``the $100,000 and $400,000 amounts'' and 
     inserting ``the $200,000 and $800,000 amounts'', and
       (2) in clause (ii), by striking ``calendar year 2002'' and 
     inserting ``calendar year 2006''.
       (d) Revocation of Election.--Section 179(c)(2) of such Code 
     (relating to election irrevocable) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(2) Revocability of election.--Any election made under 
     this section, and any specification contained in any such 
     election, may be revoked by the taxpayer with respect to any 
     property, and such revocation, once made, shall be 
     irrevocable.''.
       (e) Off-the-Shelf Computer Software.--Section 
     179(d)(1)(A)(ii) of such Code (relating to section 179 
     property) is amended by striking ``and before 2010''.
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2006.
                                  ____


                                 S. 270

       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 ``Small Business Tax 
     Flexibility Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. QUALIFIED SMALL BUSINESSES ELECTION OF TAXABLE YEAR 
                   ENDING IN A MONTH FROM APRIL TO NOVEMBER.

       (a) In General.--Part I of subchapter E of chapter 1 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to accounting 
     periods) is amended by inserting after section 444 the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 444A. QUALIFIED SMALL BUSINESSES ELECTION OF TAXABLE 
                   YEAR ENDING IN A MONTH FROM APRIL TO NOVEMBER.

       ``(a) General Rule.--A qualified small business may elect 
     to have a taxable year, other than the required taxable year, 
     which ends on the last day of any of the months of April 
     through November (or at the end of an equivalent annual 
     period (varying from 52 to 53 weeks)).
       ``(b) Years for Which Election Effective.--An election 
     under subsection (a)--
       ``(1) shall be made not later than the due date (including 
     extensions thereof) for filing the return of tax for the 
     first taxable year of the qualified small business, and
       ``(2) shall be effective for such first taxable year or 
     period and for all succeeding taxable years of such qualified 
     small business until such election is terminated under 
     subsection (c).
       ``(c) Termination.--
       ``(1) In general.--An election under subsection (a) shall 
     be terminated on the earliest of--
       ``(A) the first day of the taxable year following the 
     taxable year for which the entity fails to meet the gross 
     receipts test,
       ``(B) the date on which the entity fails to qualify as an S 
     corporation, or
       ``(C) the date on which the entity terminates.
       ``(2) Gross receipts test.--For purposes of paragraph (1), 
     an entity fails to meet the gross receipts test if the entity 
     fails to meet the gross receipts test of section 448(c).
       ``(3) Effect of termination.--An entity with respect to 
     which an election is terminated under this subsection shall 
     determine its taxable year for subsequent taxable years under 
     any other method that would be permitted under subtitle A.
       ``(4) Income inclusion and deduction rules for period after 
     termination.--If the termination of an election under 
     paragraph (1)(A) results in a short taxable year--
       ``(A) items relating to net profits for the period 
     beginning on the day after its last fiscal year-end and 
     ending on the day before the beginning of the taxable year 
     determined under paragraph (3) shall be includible in income 
     ratably over the 4 taxable years following the year of 
     termination, or (if fewer) the number of taxable years equal 
     to the fiscal years for which the election under this section 
     was in effect, and
       ``(B) items relating to net losses for such period shall be 
     deductible in the first taxable

[[Page 897]]

     year after the taxable year with respect to which the 
     election terminated.
       ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Qualified small business.--The term `qualified small 
     business' means an entity--
       ``(A)(i) for which an election under section 1362(a) is in 
     effect for the first taxable year or period of such entity 
     and for all subsequent years, or
       ``(ii) which is treated as a partnership for the first 
     taxable year or period of such entity for Federal income tax 
     purposes,
       ``(B) which conducts an active trade or business or which 
     would qualify for an election to amortize start-up 
     expenditures under section 195, and
       ``(C) which is a start-up business.
       ``(2) Start-up business.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(C), 
     an entity shall be treated as a start-up business so long as 
     not more than 75 percent of the entity is owned by any person 
     or persons who previously conducted a similar trade or 
     business at any time within the 1-year period ending on the 
     date on which such entity is formed. For purposes of the 
     preceding sentence, a person and any other person bearing a 
     relationship to such person specified in section 267(b) or 
     707(b)(1) shall be treated as one person, and sections 267(b) 
     and 707(b)(1) shall be applied as if section 267(c)(4) 
     provided that the family of an individual consists of the 
     individual's spouse and the individual's children under the 
     age of 21.
       ``(3) Required taxable year.--The term `required taxable 
     year' has the meaning given to such term by section 444(e).
       ``(e) Tiered Structures.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     rules similar to the rules of section 444(d)(3) to eliminate 
     abuse of this section through the use of tiered 
     structures.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 444(a)(1) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``section,'' and inserting ``section and section 444A''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for part I 
     of subchapter E of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 444 the following new item:

``Sec. 444A. Qualified small businesses election of taxable year ending 
              in a month from April to November.''.

       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2006.
                                  ____


                                 S. 271

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

     SECTION 1. RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF CERTAIN 
                   IMPROVEMENTS TO RETAIL SPACE.

       (a) 15-Year Recovery Period.--Subparagraph (E) of section 
     168(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     15-year property) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end 
     of clause (vii), by striking the period at the end of clause 
     (viii) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the 
     following new clause:
       ``(ix) any qualified retail improvement property.''.
       (b) Qualified Retail Improvement Property.--Subsection (e) 
     of section 168 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(8) Qualified retail improvement property.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified retail improvement 
     property' means any improvement to an interior portion of a 
     building which is nonresidential real property if--
       ``(i) such portion is open to the general public and is 
     used in the trade or business of selling tangible personal 
     property or services to the general public; and
       ``(ii) such improvement is placed in service more than 3 
     years after the date the building was first placed in 
     service.
       ``(B) Certain improvements not included.--Such term shall 
     not include any improvement for which the expenditure is 
     attributable to--
       ``(i) the enlargement of the building,
       ``(ii) any elevator or escalator, or
       ``(iii) the internal structural framework of the 
     building.''.
       (c) Requirement to Use Straight Line Method.--Paragraph (3) 
     of section 168(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(I) Qualified retail improvement property described in 
     subsection (e)(8).''.
       (d) Alternative System.--The table contained in section 
     168(g)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
     by inserting after the item relating to subparagraph 
     (E)(viii) the following new item:

``(E)(ix).....................................................39''.....

       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to qualified retail improvement property placed 
     in service after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. COLEMAN:
  S. 272. A bill to amend Public Law 87-383 to reauthorize 
appropriations to promote the conservation of migratory waterfowl and 
to offset or prevent the serious loss of important wetland and other 
waterfowl habitat essential to the preservation of migratory waterfowl, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill I introduce today--to amend Public Law 87-383 to reauthorize 
appropriations to promote the conservation of migratory waterfowl and 
to offset or prevent the serious loss of important wetland and other 
waterfowl habitat essential to preservation of migratory waterfowl, and 
for other purposes--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. 272

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

     SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF FUNDS FOR CONSERVATION OF 
                   MIGRATORY WATERFOWL AND HABITAT.

       The first section of Public Law 87-383 (16 U.S.C. 715k-3) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``That in'' and inserting the following:

     ``SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF FUNDS FOR CONSERVATION OF 
                   MIGRATORY WATERFOWL HABITAT.

       ``(a) In General.--In'';
       (2) by striking ``for the period'' and all that follows 
     through the end of the sentence and inserting ``$400,000,000 
     for the period of fiscal years 2008 through 2017.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Advance to Migratory Bird Conservation Fund.--Funds 
     appropriated pursuant to this Act shall be treated as an 
     advance, without interest, to the Migratory Bird Conservation 
     Fund.
       ``(c) Repayment to Treasury.--
       ``(1) In general.--Effective beginning July 1, 2008, funds 
     appropriated pursuant to this Act shall be repaid to the 
     Treasury out of the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund.
       ``(2) Amounts.--Repayment under this subsection shall be 
     made in annual amounts that are equal to the funds accruing 
     annually to the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund that are 
     attributable to the portion of the price of migratory bird 
     hunting stamps sold that year that is in excess of $15 per 
     stamp.''.

     SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS.

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the funds provided pursuant to the amendments made by 
     this Act--
       (A) should be used for preserving and increasing waterfowl 
     populations in accordance with the goals and objectives of 
     the North American Waterfowl Management Plan; and
       (B) to that end, should be used to supplement and not 
     replace current conservation funding, including funding for 
     other Federal and State habitat conservation programs; and
       (2) this Act and the amendments made by this Act should be 
     implemented in a manner that helps private landowners achieve 
     long-term land use objectives in a manner that enhances the 
     conservation of wetland and wildlife habitat.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER:
  S. 273. A bill to amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security 
Act to authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 
negotiate for lower prices for Medicare prescription drugs; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to 
introduce the Prescription Drug and Health Improvement Act of 2007 to 
reduce the high prices of prescription drugs for Medicare 
beneficiaries. I introduced a similar version of this bill in the 108th 
and the 109th Congress, S. 2766 and S. 813, respectively.
  Americans, specifically senior citizens, pay the highest prices in 
the world for brand-name prescription drugs. With 46.6 million 
uninsured Americans and many more senior citizens without an adequate 
prescription drug benefit, filling a doctor's prescription is 
unaffordable for many people in this country. The United States has the 
greatest health care system in the world; however, too many seniors are 
forced to make difficult choices between life-sustaining prescription 
drugs and daily necessities.
  The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services report that in 2005, 
per capita spending on prescription drugs rose approximately 7 percent, 
with a similar rate of growth expected for this year. Much of the 
increase in drug spending is due to higher utilization and the shift 
from older, lower cost

[[Page 898]]

drugs to newer, higher cost drugs. However, rapidly increasing drug 
prices are a critical component.
  High drug prices, combined with the surging older population, are 
also taking a toll on State budgets and private sector health insurance 
benefits. Medicaid spending on prescription drugs rose by 7.5 percent 
between 2004 and 2005. Until lower priced drugs are available, 
pressures will continue to squeeze public programs at both the State 
and Federal level.
  To address these problems, my legislation would reduce the high 
prices of prescription drugs to seniors by repealing the prohibition 
against interference by the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
(HHS) with negotiations between drug manufacturers, pharmacies, and 
prescription drug plan sponsors and instead authorize the Secretary to 
negotiate contracts with manufacturers of covered prescription drugs. 
It will allow the Secretary to use Medicare's large beneficiary 
population to leverage bargaining power to obtain lower prescription 
drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries.
  Price negotiations between the Secretary of HHS and prescription drug 
manufacturers would be analogous to the ability of the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs to negotiate prescription drug prices with 
manufacturers. This bargaining power enables veterans to receive 
prescription drugs at a significant cost savings. According to the 
National Association of Chain Drug Stores, the average ``cash cost'' of 
a prescription in 2005 was $51.89. The average cost in the Veterans 
Affairs (VA) health care system in fiscal year 2006 was $28.61.
  In the 108th Congress, in my capacity as chairman of the Veterans' 
Affairs Committee, I introduced the Veterans Prescription Drugs 
Assistance Act, S. 1153, which was reported out of committee, but was 
not considered before the full Senate. In the 109th Congress, I again 
introduced the Veterans Prescription Drugs Assistance Act, S. 614, 
which was not reported out of committee.
  This legislation will broaden the ability of veterans to access the 
Veterans Affairs' Prescription Drug Program. Under my bill, all 
Medicare-eligible veterans will be able to purchase medications at a 
tremendous price reduction through the Veterans Affairs' Prescription 
Drug Program. In many cases, this will save veterans who are Medicare 
beneficiaries up to 50 percent on the cost of prescribed medications, a 
significant savings for veterans. Similar savings may be available to 
America's seniors from the savings achieved using the HHS bargaining 
power, like the Veterans Affairs bargaining power for the benefit of 
veterans. These savings may provide America's seniors with fiscal 
relief from the increasing costs of prescription drugs.
  I believe this bill can provide desperately needed access to 
inexpensive, effective prescription drugs for America's seniors. The 
time has come for concerted action in this arena. I urge my colleagues 
to move this legislation forward promptly.
  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. 273

       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 ``Prescription Drug and Health 
     Improvement Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. NEGOTIATING FAIR PRICES FOR MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION 
                   DRUGS.

       (a) Negotiating Fair Prices.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1860D-11 of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-111) is amended by striking subsection 
     (i) (relating to noninterference) and by inserting the 
     following:
       ``(i) Authority To Negotiate Prices With Manufacturers.--In 
     order to ensure that beneficiaries enrolled under 
     prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans pay the lowest 
     possible price, the Secretary shall have authority similar to 
     that of other Federal entities that purchase prescription 
     drugs in bulk to negotiate contracts with manufacturers of 
     covered part D drugs, consistent with the requirements and in 
     furtherance of the goals of providing quality care and 
     containing costs under this part.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) HHS Reports Comparing Negotiated Prescription Drug 
     Prices and Retail Prescription Drug Prices.--Beginning in 
     2008, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
     regularly, but in no case less often than quarterly, submit 
     to Congress a report that compares the prices for covered 
     part D drugs (as defined in section 1860D-2(e) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102(e)) negotiated by the 
     Secretary pursuant to section 1860D-11(i) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-111(i)), as amended by subsection (a), with the 
     average price a retail pharmacy would charge an individual 
     who does not have health insurance coverage for purchasing 
     the same strength, quantity, and dosage form of such covered 
     part D drug.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Levin, 
        Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Carper, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Pryor, and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 274. A bill to amend chapter 23 of title 5, United States Code, to 
clarify the disclosures of information protected from prohibited 
personnel practices, require a statement in nondisclosure policies, 
forms, and agreements that such policies, forms, and agreements conform 
with certain disclosure protections, provide certain authority for the 
Special Counsel, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I rise to reintroduce the Federal 
Employee Protection of Disclosures Act, which will make much needed 
changes to the Whistleblower Protection Act, WPA. I am pleased once 
again to be joined in this effort by Senators Collins, Grassley, Levin, 
Lieberman, Leahy, Voinovich, Carper, Durbin, Pryor, and Lautenberg.
  Senator Levin and I first introduced this legislation in 2000. In the 
House, Representatives Henry Waxman and Tom Davis, the chairman and 
ranking member of the House Government Reform Committee, and 
Representative Todd Platts, who has sponsored companion legislation 
since 2003, have been working to enact strong whistleblower 
protections.
  Over the years, we've worked to educate our colleagues on the need to 
strengthen the WPA and build consensus for the legislation. I'm 
especially pleased that last year our bill passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent as an amendment to the fiscal year 2007 Defense 
Authorization Act. While the measure was removed with other non-defense 
specific material in conference, I believe the Senate's action will 
provide the momentum to make a real difference for Federal 
whistleblowers in the 110th Congress.
  We agree that to ensure the success of any government program there 
must be appropriate checks in place to weed out mismanagement and 
wasteful spending. A strong and vibrant WPA is a critical tool in 
saving taxpayer money and ensuring an open government.
  The Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act addresses many 
court decisions that have eroded protections for Federal employees and 
have ignored congressional intent. Our legislation ensures that Federal 
whistleblowers are protected from retaliatory action when notifying the 
public and government leaders of waste, fraud, and abuse. If we fail to 
protect whistleblowers, then our efforts to improve government 
management, protect the public, and secure the nation will also fail.
  The legislation: clarifies congressional intent that Federal 
employees are protected for any disclosure of waste, fraud, or abuse--
including those made as part of an employee's job duties; provides an 
independent determination as to whether the loss or denial of a 
security clearance is retaliation against a whistleblower; and suspends 
the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals' sole jurisdiction over Federal 
employee whistleblower cases for 5 years, which would ensure a fuller 
review of a whistleblower's claim.
  Given that the United States will be fighting the war on terror for 
years to come and that funding such operations requires significant 
resources, it is imperative that government funds are

[[Page 899]]

spent wisely. That is why Federal employees must be confident that they 
can disclose government waste, fraud, and abuse without fear of 
retaliation. Restoring credibility to the WPA is no less than a 
necessity. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this 
critical legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation 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. 274

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

     SECTION 1. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN DISCLOSURES OF INFORMATION 
                   BY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Federal 
     Employee Protection of Disclosures Act''.
       (b) Clarification of Disclosures Covered.--Section 
     2302(b)(8) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) by striking ``which the employee or applicant 
     reasonably believes evidences'' and inserting ``, without 
     restriction to time, place, form, motive, context, or prior 
     disclosure made to any person by an employee or applicant, 
     including a disclosure made in the ordinary course of an 
     employee's duties, that the employee or applicant reasonably 
     believes is evidence of''; and
       (B) in clause (i), by striking ``a violation'' and 
     inserting ``any violation''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) by striking ``which the employee or applicant 
     reasonably believes evidences'' and inserting ``, without 
     restriction to time, place, form, motive, context, or prior 
     disclosure made to any person by an employee or applicant, 
     including a disclosure made in the ordinary course of an 
     employee's duties, of information that the employee or 
     applicant reasonably believes is evidence of''; and
       (B) in clause (i), by striking ``a violation'' and 
     inserting ``any violation (other than a violation of this 
     section)''.
       (c) Covered Disclosures.--Section 2302(a)(2) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ``and'' at the 
     end;
       (2) in subparagraph (C)(iii), by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) `disclosure' means a formal or informal communication 
     or transmission, but does not include a communication 
     concerning policy decisions that lawfully exercise 
     discretionary authority unless the employee providing the 
     disclosure reasonably believes that the disclosure 
     evidences--
       ``(i) any violation of any law, rule, or regulation; or
       ``(ii) gross mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an 
     abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to 
     public health or safety.''.
       (d) Rebuttable Presumption.--Section 2302(b) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by amending the matter 
     following paragraph (12) to read as follows:

     ``This subsection shall not be construed to authorize the 
     withholding of information from Congress or the taking of any 
     personnel action against an employee who discloses 
     information to Congress, except that an employee or applicant 
     may be disciplined for the disclosure of information 
     described in paragraph (8)(C)(i) to a Member or employee of 
     Congress who is not authorized to receive such information. 
     For purposes of paragraph (8), a determination as to whether 
     an employee or applicant reasonably believes that they have 
     disclosed information that evidences any violation of law, 
     rule, regulation, gross mismanagement, a gross waste of 
     funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific 
     danger to public health or safety shall be made by 
     determining whether a disinterested observer with knowledge 
     of the essential facts known to and readily ascertainable by 
     the employee could reasonably conclude that the actions of 
     the Government evidence such violations, mismanagement, 
     waste, abuse, or danger.''.
       (e) Nondisclosure Policies, Forms, and Agreements; Security 
     Clearances; and Retaliatory Investigations.--
       (1) Personnel action.--Section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in clause (x), by striking ``and'' after the semicolon; 
     and
       (B) by redesignating clause (xi) as clause (xiv) and 
     inserting after clause (x) the following:
       ``(xi) the implementation or enforcement of any 
     nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement;
       ``(xii) a suspension, revocation, or other determination 
     relating to a security clearance or any other access 
     determination by a covered agency;
       ``(xiii) an investigation, other than any ministerial or 
     nondiscretionary fact finding activities necessary for the 
     agency to perform its mission, of an employee or applicant 
     for employment because of any activity protected under this 
     section; and''
       (2) Prohibited personnel practice.--Section 2302(b) of 
     title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (11), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (12), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (12) the following:
       ``(13) implement or enforce any nondisclosure policy, form, 
     or agreement, if such policy, form, or agreement does not 
     contain the following statement: `These provisions are 
     consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or 
     otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or 
     liabilities created by Executive Order No. 12958; section 
     7211 of title 5, United States Code (governing disclosures to 
     Congress); section 1034 of title 10, United States Code 
     (governing disclosure to Congress by members of the 
     military); section 2302(b)(8) of title 5, United States Code 
     (governing disclosures of illegality, waste, fraud, abuse, or 
     public health or safety threats); the Intelligence Identities 
     Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421 et seq.) (governing 
     disclosures that could expose confidential Government 
     agents); and the statutes which protect against disclosures 
     that could compromise national security, including sections 
     641, 793, 794, 798, and 952 of title 18, United States Code, 
     and section 4(b) of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 
     1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)). The definitions, requirements, 
     obligations, rights, sanctions, and liabilities created by 
     such Executive order and such statutory provisions are 
     incorporated into this agreement and are controlling'; or
       ``(14) conduct, or cause to be conducted, an investigation, 
     other than any ministerial or nondiscretionary fact finding 
     activities necessary for the agency to perform its mission, 
     of an employee or applicant for employment because of any 
     activity protected under this section.''.
       (3) Board and court review of actions relating to security 
     clearances.--
       (A) In general.--Chapter 77 of title 5, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 7702 the following:

     ``Sec. 7702a. Actions relating to security clearances

       ``(a) In any appeal relating to the suspension, revocation, 
     or other determination relating to a security clearance or 
     access determination, the Merit Systems Protection Board or 
     any reviewing court--
       ``(1) shall determine whether paragraph (8) or (9) of 
     section 2302(b) was violated;
       ``(2) may not order the President or the designee of the 
     President to restore a security clearance or otherwise 
     reverse a determination of clearance status or reverse an 
     access determination; and
       ``(3) subject to paragraph (2), may issue declaratory 
     relief and any other appropriate relief.
       ``(b)(1) If, in any final judgment, the Board or court 
     declares that any suspension, revocation, or other 
     determination with regard to a security clearance or access 
     determination was made in violation of paragraph (8) or (9) 
     of section 2302(b), the affected agency shall conduct a 
     review of that suspension, revocation, access determination, 
     or other determination, giving great weight to the Board or 
     court judgment.
       ``(2) Not later than 30 days after any Board or court 
     judgment declaring that a security clearance suspension, 
     revocation, access determination, or other determination was 
     made in violation of paragraph (8) or (9) of section 2302(b), 
     the affected agency shall issue an unclassified report to the 
     congressional committees of jurisdiction (with a classified 
     annex if necessary), detailing the circumstances of the 
     agency's security clearance suspension, revocation, other 
     determination, or access determination. A report under this 
     paragraph shall include any proposed agency action with 
     regard to the security clearance or access determination.
       ``(c) An allegation that a security clearance or access 
     determination was revoked or suspended in retaliation for a 
     protected disclosure shall receive expedited review by the 
     Office of Special Counsel, the Merit Systems Protection 
     Board, and any reviewing court.
       ``(d) For purposes of this section, corrective action may 
     not be ordered if the agency demonstrates by a preponderance 
     of the evidence that it would have taken the same personnel 
     action in the absence of such disclosure.''.
       (B) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 77 of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 7702 
     the following:

``7702a. Actions relating to security clearances.''.

       (f) Exclusion of Agencies by the President.--Section 
     2302(a)(2)(C) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking clause (ii) and inserting the following:
       ``(ii)(I) the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central 
     Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the 
     National Imagery and Mapping Agency, the National Security 
     Agency; and

[[Page 900]]

       ``(II) as determined by the President, any executive agency 
     or unit thereof the principal function of which is the 
     conduct of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence 
     activities, if the determination (as that determination 
     relates to a personnel action) is made before that personnel 
     action; or''.
       (g) Attorney Fees.--Section 1204(m)(1) of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``agency involved'' and 
     inserting ``agency where the prevailing party is employed or 
     has applied for employment''.
       (h) Disciplinary Action.--Section 1215(a)(3) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3)(A) A final order of the Board may impose--
       ``(i) disciplinary action consisting of removal, reduction 
     in grade, debarment from Federal employment for a period not 
     to exceed 5 years, suspension, or reprimand;
       ``(ii) an assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed 
     $1,000; or
       ``(iii) any combination of disciplinary actions described 
     under clause (i) and an assessment described under clause 
     (ii).
       ``(B) In any case in which the Board finds that an employee 
     has committed a prohibited personnel practice under paragraph 
     (8) or (9) of section 2302(b), the Board shall impose 
     disciplinary action if the Board finds that the activity 
     protected under paragraph (8) or (9) of section 2302(b) was a 
     significant motivating factor, even if other factors also 
     motivated the decision, for the employee's decision to take, 
     fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take a personnel 
     action, unless that employee demonstrates, by preponderance 
     of evidence, that the employee would have taken, failed to 
     take, or threatened to take or fail to take the same 
     personnel action, in the absence of such protected 
     activity.''.
       (i) Special Counsel Amicus Curiae Appearance.--Section 1212 
     of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(h)(1) The Special Counsel is authorized to appear as 
     amicus curiae in any action brought in a court of the United 
     States related to any civil action brought in connection with 
     section 2302(b) (8) or (9), or subchapter III of chapter 73, 
     or as otherwise authorized by law. In any such action, the 
     Special Counsel is authorized to present the views of the 
     Special Counsel with respect to compliance with section 
     2302(b) (8) or (9) or subchapter III of chapter 73 and the 
     impact court decisions would have on the enforcement of such 
     provisions of law.
       ``(2) A court of the United States shall grant the 
     application of the Special Counsel to appear in any such 
     action for the purposes described in subsection (a).''.
       (j) Judicial Review.--
       (1) In general.--Section 7703(b)(1) of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b)(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B) and 
     paragraph (2), a petition to review a final order or final 
     decision of the Board shall be filed in the United States 
     Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, any petition for review must be filed 
     within 60 days after the date the petitioner received notice 
     of the final order or decision of the Board.
       ``(B) During the 5-year period beginning on the effective 
     date of the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act, a 
     petition to review a final order or final decision of the 
     Board in a case alleging a violation of paragraph (8) or (9) 
     of section 2302(b) shall be filed in the United States Court 
     of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or any court of appeals of 
     competent jurisdiction as provided under subsection 
     (b)(2).''.
       (2) Review obtained by office of personnel management.--
     Section 7703(d) of title 5, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(d)(1) Except as provided under paragraph (2), this 
     paragraph shall apply to any review obtained by the Director 
     of the Office of Personnel Management. The Director of the 
     Office of Personnel Management may obtain review of any final 
     order or decision of the Board by filing, within 60 days 
     after the date the Director received notice of the final 
     order or decision of the Board, a petition for judicial 
     review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 
     Circuit if the Director determines, in his discretion, that 
     the Board erred in interpreting a civil service law, rule, or 
     regulation affecting personnel management and that the 
     Board's decision will have a substantial impact on a civil 
     service law, rule, regulation, or policy directive. If the 
     Director did not intervene in a matter before the Board, the 
     Director may not petition for review of a Board decision 
     under this section unless the Director first petitions the 
     Board for a reconsideration of its decision, and such 
     petition is denied. In addition to the named respondent, the 
     Board and all other parties to the proceedings before the 
     Board shall have the right to appear in the proceeding before 
     the Court of Appeals. The granting of the petition for 
     judicial review shall be at the discretion of the Court of 
     Appeals.
       ``(2) During the 5-year period beginning on the effective 
     date of the Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act, 
     this paragraph shall apply to any review relating to 
     paragraph (8) or (9) of section 2302(b) obtained by the 
     Director of the Office of Personnel Management. The Director 
     of the Office of Personnel Management may obtain review of 
     any final order or decision of the Board by filing, within 60 
     days after the date the Director received notice of the final 
     order or decision of the Board, a petition for judicial 
     review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 
     Circuit or any court of appeals of competent jurisdiction as 
     provided under subsection (b)(2) if the Director determines, 
     in his discretion, that the Board erred in interpreting 
     paragraph (8) or (9) of section 2302(b). If the Director did 
     not intervene in a matter before the Board, the Director may 
     not petition for review of a Board decision under this 
     section unless the Director first petitions the Board for a 
     reconsideration of its decision, and such petition is denied. 
     In addition to the named respondent, the Board and all other 
     parties to the proceedings before the Board shall have the 
     right to appear in the proceeding before the court of 
     appeals. The granting of the petition for judicial review 
     shall be at the discretion of the Court of Appeals.''.
       (k) Nondisclosure Policies, Forms, and Agreements.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Requirement.--Each agreement in Standard Forms 312 and 
     4414 of the Government and any other nondisclosure policy, 
     form, or agreement of the Government shall contain the 
     following statement: ``These restrictions are consistent with 
     and do not supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the 
     employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by 
     Executive Order No. 12958; section 7211 of title 5, United 
     States Code (governing disclosures to Congress); section 1034 
     of title 10, United States Code (governing disclosure to 
     Congress by members of the military); section 2302(b)(8) of 
     title 5, United States Code (governing disclosures of 
     illegality, waste, fraud, abuse or public health or safety 
     threats); the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 
     (50 U.S.C. 421 et seq.) (governing disclosures that could 
     expose confidential Government agents); and the statutes 
     which protect against disclosure that may compromise the 
     national security, including sections 641, 793, 794, 798, and 
     952 of title 18, United States Code, and section 4(b) of the 
     Subversive Activities Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)). The 
     definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, 
     and liabilities created by such Executive order and such 
     statutory provisions are incorporated into this agreement and 
     are controlling.''.
       (B) Enforceability.--Any nondisclosure policy, form, or 
     agreement described under subparagraph (A) that does not 
     contain the statement required under subparagraph (A) may not 
     be implemented or enforced to the extent such policy, form, 
     or agreement is inconsistent with that statement.
       (2) Persons other than government employees.--
     Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a nondisclosure policy, form, 
     or agreement that is to be executed by a person connected 
     with the conduct of an intelligence or intelligence-related 
     activity, other than an employee or officer of the United 
     States Government, may contain provisions appropriate to the 
     particular activity for which such document is to be used. 
     Such form or agreement shall, at a minimum, require that the 
     person will not disclose any classified information received 
     in the course of such activity unless specifically authorized 
     to do so by the United States Government. Such nondisclosure 
     forms shall also make it clear that such forms do not bar 
     disclosures to Congress or to an authorized official of an 
     executive agency or the Department of Justice that are 
     essential to reporting a substantial violation of law.
       (l) Clarification of Whistleblower Rights for Critical 
     Infrastructure Information.--Section 214(c) of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 133(c)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following: ``For purposes of this section a 
     permissible use of independently obtained information 
     includes the disclosure of such information under section 
     2302(b)(8) of title 5, United States Code.''.
       (m) Advising Employees of Rights.--Section 2302(c) of title 
     5, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, including 
     how to make a lawful disclosure of information that is 
     specifically required by law or Executive order to be kept 
     secret in the interest of national defense or the conduct of 
     foreign affairs to the Special Counsel, the Inspector General 
     of an agency, Congress, or other agency employee designated 
     to receive such disclosures'' after ``chapter 12 of this 
     title''.
       (n) Scope of Due Process.--
       (1) Special counsel.--Section 1214(b)(4)(B)(ii) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, after a 
     finding that a protected disclosure was a contributing 
     factor,'' after ``ordered if''.
       (2) Individual action.--Section 1221(e)(2) of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, after a 
     finding that a protected disclosure was a contributing 
     factor,'' after ``ordered if''.
       (o) Effective Date.--This Act shall take effect 30 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):

[[Page 901]]

  S. 275. A bill to establish the Prehistoric Trackways National 
Monument in the State of New Mexico; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I'm pleased to reintroduce today with 
Senator Domenici a bill we introduced last Congress. The Prehistoric 
Trackways National Monument Establishment Act would protect a site of 
worldwide scientific significance in the Robledo Mountains in my State. 
The bill would create a national monument to preserve and allow for the 
continuing scientific investigation of this remarkable 
``megatracksite'' of 280,000,000 year-old fossils. The Energy Committee 
held a hearing last year where the Bureau of Land Management testified 
in support; in addition the bill has the support of the local 
community. I appreciate Senator Domenici's support on this measure and 
hope that with the progress we made last Congress we can look forward 
to moving the bill quickly through the Senate this year.
  The vast tidal mudflats that made up much of modern New Mexico 60 
million years before the dinosaurs preserved the marks of some of the 
earliest life on our planet to make its way out of the ocean. The 
fossil record of this time is scattered throughout New Mexico but, 
until this discovery, there were few places where the range of life and 
their interactions with each other could be studied.
  Las Cruces resident Jerry MacDonald first brought the find to light 
in 1988 when he revealed that there was far more to be found in the 
Robledos than the occasional fossil that local residents had been 
seeing for years. The trackways he hauled out on his back, some over 20 
feet long, showed that there was a great deal of useful information 
buried in the rock there. These trackways help complete the puzzle of 
how these ancient creatures lived in a way that we cannot understand 
from only studying their fossilized bones.
  Senator Domenici and Representative Skeen joined me in creating 
legislation, passed in 1990, to protect the area and study its 
scientific value. In 1994, scientists from the New Mexico Museum of 
Natural History and Science, the University of Colorado, and the 
Smithsonian Institution completed their study and documented the 
significant scientific value of the find. Particularly owing to the 
quality of the specimens and the wide range of animals that had left 
their imprint there the study found that the site was of immense 
scientific value. The study concluded, in part, ``[t]he diversity, 
abundance and quality of the tracks in the Robledo Mountains is far 
greater than at any other known tracksite or aggregation of tracksites. 
Because of this, the Robledo tracks allow a wide range of scientific 
problems regarding late Paleozoic tracks to be solved that could not be 
solved before.'' This bill would take the next logical step to follow 
up from these efforts and set in place permanent protections and allow 
for scientific investigation of these remarkable resources.
  In addition to permanently protecting the fossils for the scientific 
community the bill would make it a priority that local residents get 
the opportunity to see these unique specimens and participate in their 
curation. This should provide a unique scientific and educational 
opportunity to Las Cruces and the surrounding community.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to protect these 
important resources and allow for their continuing contribution to our 
understanding of life on the ancient earth.
  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. 275

       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 ``Prehistoric Trackways 
     National Monument Establishment Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Monument.--The term ``Monument'' means the Prehistoric 
     Trackways National Monument established by section 4(a).
       (2) Public land.--The term ``public land'' has the meaning 
     given the term ``public lands'' in section 103 of the Federal 
     Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702).
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) in 1987, a major deposit of Paleozoic Era fossilized 
     footprint megatrackways was discovered in the Robledo 
     Mountains in southern New Mexico;
       (2) the trackways contain footprints of numerous 
     amphibians, reptiles, and insects (including previously 
     unknown species), plants, and petrified wood dating back 
     approximately 280,000,000 years, which collectively provide 
     new opportunities to understand animal behaviors and 
     environments from a time predating the dinosaurs;
       (3) title III of Public Law 101-578 (104 Stat. 2860)--
       (A) provided interim protection for the site at which the 
     trackways were discovered; and
       (B) directed the Secretary of the Interior to--
       (i) prepare a study assessing the significance of the site; 
     and
       (ii) based on the study, provide recommendations for 
     protection of the paleontological resources at the site;
       (4) the Bureau of Land Management completed the Paleozoic 
     Trackways Scientific Study Report in 1994, which 
     characterized the site as containing ``the most 
     scientifically significant Early Permian tracksites'' in the 
     world;
       (5) despite the conclusion of the study and the 
     recommendations for protection, the site remains unprotected 
     and many irreplaceable trackways specimens have been lost to 
     vandalism or theft; and
       (6) designation of the trackways site as a National 
     Monument would protect the unique fossil resources for 
     present and future generations while allowing for public 
     education and continued scientific research opportunities.

     SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT.

       (a) In General.--In order to conserve, protect, and enhance 
     the unique and nationally important paleontological, 
     scientific, educational, scenic, and recreational resources 
     and values of the public land described in subsection (b), 
     there is established the Prehistoric Trackways National 
     Monument in the State of New Mexico.
       (b) Description of Land.--The Monument shall consist of 
     approximately 5,367 acres of public land in Dona Ana County, 
     New Mexico, as generally depicted on the map entitled 
     ``Prehistoric Trackways National Monument'' and dated June 1, 
     2006.
       (c) Map; Legal Description.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare and submit 
     to Congress an official map and legal description of the 
     Monument.
       (2) Corrections.--The map and legal description submitted 
     under paragraph (1) shall have the same force and effect as 
     if included in this Act, except that the Secretary may 
     correct any clerical or typographical errors in the legal 
     description and the map.
       (3) Conflict between map and legal description.--In the 
     case of a conflict between the map and the legal description, 
     the map shall control.
       (4) Availability of map and legal description.--Copies of 
     the map and legal description shall be on file and available 
     for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the 
     Bureau of Land Management.
       (d) Minor Boundary Adjustments.--If additional 
     paleontological resources are discovered on public land 
     adjacent to the Monument after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary may make minor boundary adjustments to the 
     Monument to include the resources in the Monument.

     SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Management.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall manage the Monument--
       (A) in a manner that conserves, protects, and enhances the 
     resources and values of the Monument, including the resources 
     and values described in section 4(a); and
       (B) in accordance with--
       (i) this Act;
       (ii) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 
     U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); and
       (iii) other applicable laws.
       (2) National landscape conservation system.--The Monument 
     shall be managed as a component of the National Landscape 
     Conservation System.
       (3) Protection of resources and values.--The Secretary 
     shall manage public land adjacent to the Monument in a manner 
     that is consistent with the protection of the resources and 
     values of the Monument.
       (b) Management Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop a 
     comprehensive management plan for the long-term protection 
     and management of the Monument.
       (2) Components.--The management plan under paragraph (1)--
       (A) shall--

[[Page 902]]

       (i) describe the appropriate uses and management of the 
     Monument, consistent with the provisions of this Act; and
       (ii) allow for continued scientific research at the 
     Monument during the development of the management plan; and
       (B) may--
       (i) incorporate any appropriate decisions contained in any 
     current management or activity plan for the land described in 
     section 4(b); and
       (ii) use information developed in studies of any land 
     within or adjacent to the Monument that were conducted before 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Authorized Uses.--The Secretary shall only allow uses 
     of the Monument that the Secretary determines would further 
     the purposes for which the Monument has been established.
       (d) Interpretation, Education, and Scientific Research.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide for public 
     interpretation of, and education and scientific research on, 
     the paleontological resources of the Monument, with priority 
     given to exhibiting and curating the resources in Dona Ana 
     County, New Mexico.
       (2) Cooperative agreements.--The Secretary may enter into 
     cooperative agreements with appropriate public entities to 
     carry out paragraph (1).
       (e) Special Management Areas.--
       (1) In general.--The establishment of the Monument shall 
     not change the management status of any area within the 
     boundary of the Monument that is--
       (A) designated as a wilderness study area and managed in 
     accordance with section 603(c) of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c)); or
       (B) managed as an area of critical environment concern.
       (2) Conflict of laws.--If there is a conflict between the 
     laws applicable to the areas described in paragraph (1) and 
     this Act, the more restrictive provision shall control.
       (f) Motorized Vehicles.--
       (1) In general.--Except as needed for administrative 
     purposes or to respond to an emergency, the use of motorized 
     vehicles in the Monument shall be allowed only on roads and 
     trails designated for use by motorized vehicles under the 
     management plan prepared under subsection (b).
       (2) Permitted events.--The Secretary may issue permits for 
     special recreation events involving motorized vehicles within 
     the boundaries of the Monument, including the ``Chile 
     Challenge''--
       (A) to the extent the events do not harm paleontological 
     resources; and
       (B) subject to any terms and conditions that the Secretary 
     determines to be necessary.
       (g) Withdrawals.--Subject to valid existing rights, any 
     Federal land within the Monument and any land or interest in 
     land that is acquired by the United States for inclusion in 
     the Monument after the date of enactment of this Act are 
     withdrawn from--
       (1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land 
     laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) operation of the mineral leasing laws, geothermal 
     leasing laws, and minerals materials laws.
       (h) Grazing.--The Secretary may allow grazing to continue 
     in any area of the Monument in which grazing is allowed 
     before the date of enactment of this Act, subject to 
     applicable laws (including regulations).
       (i) Hunting.--
       (1) In general.--Nothing in this Act diminishes the 
     jurisdiction of the State of New Mexico with respect to fish 
     and wildlife management, including regulation of hunting on 
     public land within the Monument.
       (2) Regulations.--The Secretary, after consultation with 
     the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, may issue 
     regulations designating zones in which and establishing 
     periods during which hunting shall not be allowed for reasons 
     of public safety, administration, or public use and 
     enjoyment.
       (j) Water Rights.--Nothing in this Act constitutes an 
     express or implied reservation by the United States of any 
     water or water rights with respect to the Monument.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

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

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, the fossilized trackways near Las 
Cruces, New Mexico, in Dona Ana County came to my attention in the 
early 1990's. During the 101st Congress, I cosponsored Senator 
Bingaman's legislation that directed the Bureau of Land Management to 
study and report on the significance of the prehistoric sites near the 
Robledo Mountains.
  I believe our Federal lands are truly national treasures, and I 
understand the challenges we face in managing our public lands in a 
responsible and environmentally sensitive manner. Local leaders, 
special interest groups, multiple users, New Mexico State University, 
and the Bureau of Land Management, BLM, have identified many land 
issues in the Las Cruces area that need to be addressed. The trackways 
are but one of these issues that can and should be addressed in the 
context of a broader lands bill. I continue to believe that 
introduction of comprehensive or omnibus legislation is a preferable 
approach, rather than the introduction of individual bills to deal with 
each separate issue.
  The trackways are a remarkable resource that need and deserve 
protection, and I support the intent of this bill. While I am very 
supportive of the overall goal to protect these prehistoric trackway 
sites, there are several particulars in this bill that I do not fully 
embrace and on which I want to continue to work with Senator Bingaman, 
such as ensuring that we authorize all uses in the area that are not 
inconsistent with the purposes of the bill, and reworking the section 
regarding BLM authority with respect to hunting activities. As we work 
through the legislative process, I look forward to working with Senator 
Bingaman to accomplish the objective of protecting the prehistoric 
trackway sites, while at the same time addressing some of the broader 
Federal land issues in Dona Ana County.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Sessions):
  S. 276. A bill to strengthen the consequences of the fraudulent use 
of United States or foreign passports and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, Senator Sessions and I are introducing 
legislation today that will enhance our national security by expanding 
and strengthening the current passport and visa fraud laws.
  The Passport and Visa Security Act bill adds much needed law to 
punish trafficking in passports and visas and clarifies the current 
criminal law. It also punishes those who engage in schemes to defraud 
immigrants based on changes in the immigration law.
  This bill is an improved version of a bill Senator Sessions and I 
introduced in the 109th Congress. We both have long been concerned 
about the need to strengthen our national security by strengthening our 
document fraud laws.
  In fact, we introduced our passport fraud bill well before the 
comprehensive immigration reform bill was passed in the Senate last 
Spring.
  For that reason, I was pleased that the comprehensive immigration 
reform bill contained important document fraud provisions. This bill 
builds on those provisions.
  The evidence has shown repeatedly that false immigration documents 
provide a gateway for organized crime and terrorism. The need to take 
action against this crime is clear.
  For too long, the Federal Government has moved too slowly--or not at 
all--to enhance our border security. According to the 9/11 National 
Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel, prior to September 11, 
2001, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a 
tool in the counterterrorism arsenal.
  Still today, over five years since the tragic attacks on September 
11, the Federal Government has failed to devote sufficient time, 
technology, personnel and resources to make border security a 
cornerstone of our national security policy.
  Last year, Congress passed a law to build a border fence. I believe 
this law was an important first step, but a fence alone cannot 
sufficiently protect our vulnerable borders.
  In fact, as the 9/11 Commission report demonstrates, individuals with 
fraudulent documents can pose a far greater threat to our national 
security than those traveling with no documents at all.
  Fraudulent documents give criminals free reign to create a new 
identity and to plan and carry out attacks in the United States.
  We know, for example, that at least two of the 9/11 hijackers used 
passports that were altered when they entered this country and as many 
as 15 of the 19 hijackers could have been intercepted by border 
officials, based in part on their travel documents.
  The 9/11 Commission Report detailed the way the terrorist operatives 
carefully selected the documents they used

[[Page 903]]

for travel--most often relying on fraudulent ones.
  The terrorists altered passports by substituting photographs, adding 
false visas, bleaching stamps, and by substituting pages.
  The terrorists devoted extensive resources to acquiring and 
manipulating passports--all to avoid detection of their nefarious 
activities and objectives.
  Today, over five years later, Interpol reports that they have records 
of more than 12 million stolen and lost travel documents from 113 
different countries. These are only the ones we know about.
  Interpol estimates that 30 to 40 million travel documents have been 
stolen worldwide.
  We know that over the past few years, passport and visa forgery has 
become even easier thanks to home computers, digital photography, 
scanners and color laser printing.
  News articles document that passport and visa fraud has become so 
lucrative that gangs are offering franchises in the multimillion-dollar 
scam to forgers.
  Unfortunately, it's not only foreign passports that can be forged. 
Forged and fraudulent United States passports can be the most dangerous 
when in the wrong hands.
  With a U.S. passport, criminals can establish American citizenship 
and have unlimited access to virtually every country in the world.
  It's no surprise, then, that passport and visa fraud are often linked 
to other, very serious crimes in the United States and abroad: 
narcotics trafficking, organized crimes, money laundering, human 
trafficking, and identity theft.
  For example, this past December, the son of former Liberian President 
Charles Taylor, Charles McArthur Emmanuel, who headed a violent 
paramilitary unit in his father's government, was sentenced in Miami 
for passport fraud.
  A day later, a Federal grand jury indicted him on charges of torture 
and conspiracy involving acts committed in Liberia in 2002.
  Emmanuel, also known as Charles ``Chuckie'' Taylor and Roy Belfast 
Jr., was on Interpol's Most Wanted list and the United Nations travel 
watch list.
  Nevertheless, he escaped detection by falsifying his passport 
application, ultimately gaining easy entry and exit from the United 
States while he perpetrated his crimes.
  Despite evidence that these crimes are widespread and that millions 
of travel documents are on the black market, in 2004, the State 
Department's Diplomatic Security Service reports that it made about 500 
arrests for passport fraud, with only 300 convictions.
  For these reasons, Senator Sessions and I are introducing a bill 
today to strengthen current passport and visa laws in a number of key 
ways.
  First, this bill adds two new laws with strong penalties to punish 
those who traffic in fraudulent travel documents. The current law makes 
no distinction between those caught with multiple false travel 
documents--the very worst offenders who are often part of organized 
crime rings--and those with only one false document. Our bill would 
change that.
  The bill also updates the current travel document fraud laws--using 
plain language advocated for by the practitioners that passed the 
Senate as part of the comprehensive immigration reform bill.
  Thirdly, the bill adds provisions to the current passport and visa 
fraud laws to ensure that conspiracies and attempts to commit these 
crimes are investigated and prosecuted just as vigorously as the 
completed crime.
  Fourth--the bill makes explicit that there is extraterritorial 
jurisdiction over these offenses, so that individuals who counterfeit 
travel documents while abroad but are caught trying to enter the United 
States are still subject to prosecution.
  The bill also directs the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Commissions to 
reconsider the relatively low sentencing guidelines to reflect the 
potential seriousness of these crimes.
  Currently, offenders who engage in passport or visa fraud generally 
serve less than a year imprisonment, providing little incentive for 
U.S. Attorney's Offices to expend scarce resources in prosecuting these 
crimes.
  Finally, the bill creates a law to punish sham attorneys who cheat 
immigrants out of thousands of dollars by preying on their fears that 
they could be forced to leave the country. We know that when Congress 
discusses changing the immigration law, scam artists target and exploit 
these vulnerable populations. These crimes should not go unpunished.
  This bill provides much needed reform. It strengthens the security of 
documents used to illegally gain entry to this country and empowers the 
agents and prosecutors who enforce our borders to take swift and strong 
action against these criminals.
  I ask my colleagues to join Senator Sessions and me in supporting 
this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that a bill summary and the text of this bill 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the materials were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                   The Passport and Visa Security Act
                                of 2007


                              bill summary

       Adds two new crimes to penalize the trafficking in 10 or 
     more passports or visas and creates a 20 year maximum penalty 
     for violating these provisions. Under current law, there is 
     no specific provision punishing the trafficking of multiple 
     fraudulent documents and each document must be prosecuted 
     individually.
       Simplifies the language of the current passport and visa 
     fraud laws, specifically by changing the required criminal 
     intent from ``knowingly and wilfully'' to ``knowingly.'' The 
     maximum penalty for committing these crimes is amended from 
     10 years for a first or second offense and 15 years in the 
     case of any other offense to simply 15 years.
       Creates a new crime that would penalize those who engage in 
     schemes to defraud aliens in connection with matters 
     authorized by or arising under Federal immigration laws.
        Clarifies existing law that the maximum sentence for 
     passport fraud, when used to facilitate a drug trafficking 
     crime, is 20 years; and the maximum sentence for passport 
     fraud, when used to facilitate an act of international 
     terrorism is 25 years. (This change is technical, not 
     substantive, as these are the maximum penalties already in 
     the individual sections of the criminal code.)
       Adds language to punish conspiracies and attempts to commit 
     passport fraud and other false document crimes.
       Makes explicit that there is extraterritorial jurisdiction 
     over these offenses, so that the United States can prosecute 
     individuals who may have committed a passport fraud crime 
     while abroad (e.g., the law would reach someone who 
     manufactures fake passports in Cameroon and is arrested in 
     the United States).
       Adds a definitional section to clarify the terms used in 
     these laws.
       Directs the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Commissions to 
     reconsider the current low sentencing guidelines to reflect 
     the potential seriousness of these crimes and the changes 
     made by this bill.
       Creates a rebuttable presumption that a person who commits 
     one of these crimes, or who is found to be unlawfully in the 
     country after having already been ordered deported, is to be 
     detained pending trial.
       Adds language directing the Attorney General to create 
     binding regulations to ensure that the prosecution of these 
     crimes is in keeping with current U.S. treaty obligations 
     relating to refugees (which states that refugees carrying 
     false passports should not be prosecuted) without creating a 
     private right of action to enforce this provision.
       Clarifies that the Diplomatic Security Service (of the 
     State Department) has authority to investigate these new and 
     revised crimes (using the language found in the 109th 
     Congress Senate passed immigration bill, S. 2611). The 
     Diplomatic Security Service currently investigates passport 
     fraud, this section just clarifies their authority to do so.
       Clarifies that the same statute of limitations (10 years) 
     applies to all of the offenses added or modified by this 
     bill--again incorporating language from the 109th Congress 
     Senate passed immigration bill, S. 2611.
                                  ____


                                 S. 276

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Passport 
     and Visa Security Act of 2007''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

               TITLE I--REFORM OF PASSPORT FRAUD OFFENSES

Sec. 101. Trafficking in passports.

[[Page 904]]

Sec. 102. False statement in an application for a passport.
Sec. 103. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport.
Sec. 104. Misuse of a passport.
Sec. 105. Schemes to defraud aliens.
Sec. 106. Immigration and visa fraud.
Sec. 107. Alternative imprisonment maximum for certain offenses.
Sec. 108. Attempts, conspiracies, jurisdiction, and definitions.
Sec. 109. Clerical amendment.

                        TITLE II--OTHER REFORMS

Sec. 201. Directive to the United States Sentencing Commission.
Sec. 202. Release and detention prior to disposition.
Sec. 203. Protection for legitimate refugees and asylum seekers.
Sec. 204. Diplomatic security service.
Sec. 205. Uniform statute of limitations for certain immigration, 
              passport, and naturalization offenses.

               TITLE I--REFORM OF PASSPORT FRAUD OFFENSES

     SEC. 101. TRAFFICKING IN PASSPORTS.

       Section 1541 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1541. Trafficking in passports

       ``(a) Multiple Passports.--Any person who, during any 
     period of 3 years or less, knowingly--
       ``(1) and without lawful authority produces, issues, or 
     transfers 10 or more passports;
       ``(2) forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely makes 10 or 
     more passports;
       ``(3) secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys, sells, or 
     distributes 10 or more passports, knowing the passports to be 
     forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, 
     procured by fraud, or produced or issued without lawful 
     authority; or
       ``(4) completes, mails, prepares, presents, signs, or 
     submits 10 or more applications for a United States passport, 
     knowing the applications to contain any false statement or 
     representation,
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Passport Materials.--Any person who knowingly and 
     without lawful authority produces, buys, sells, possesses, or 
     uses any official material (or counterfeit of any official 
     material) used to make a passport, including any distinctive 
     paper, seal, hologram, image, text, symbol, stamp, engraving, 
     or plate, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not 
     more than 20 years, or both.''.

     SEC. 102. FALSE STATEMENT IN AN APPLICATION FOR A PASSPORT.

       Section 1542 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1542. False statement in an application for a passport

       ``(a) In General.--Whoever knowingly makes any false 
     statement or representation in an application for a United 
     States passport, or mails, prepares, presents, or signs an 
     application for a United States passport knowing the 
     application to contain any false statement or representation, 
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Venue.--
       ``(1) In general.--An offense under subsection (a) may be 
     prosecuted in any district--
       ``(A) in which the false statement or representation was 
     made or the application for a United States passport was 
     prepared or signed; or
       ``(B) in which or to which the application was mailed or 
     presented.
       ``(2) Acts occurring outside the united states.--An offense 
     under subsection (a) involving an application for a United 
     States passport prepared and adjudicated outside the United 
     States may be prosecuted in the district in which the 
     resultant passport was or would have been produced.
       ``(c) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section may be 
     construed to limit the venue otherwise available under 
     sections 3237 and 3238 of this title.''.

     SEC. 103. FORGERY AND UNLAWFUL PRODUCTION OF A PASSPORT.

       Section 1543 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1543. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport

       ``(a) Forgery.--Any person who knowingly--
       ``(1) forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely makes any 
     passport; or
       ``(2) transfers any passport knowing it to be forged, 
     counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, or to have been 
     produced or issued without lawful authority,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Unlawful Production.--Any person who knowingly and 
     without lawful authority--
       ``(1) produces, issues, authorizes, or verifies a passport 
     in violation of the laws, regulations, or rules governing the 
     issuance of the passport;
       ``(2) produces, issues, authorizes, or verifies a United 
     States passport for or to any person knowing or in reckless 
     disregard of the fact that such person is not entitled to 
     receive a passport; or
       ``(3) transfers or furnishes a passport to any person for 
     use by any person other than the person for whom the passport 
     was issued or designed,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.''.

     SEC. 104. MISUSE OF A PASSPORT.

       Section 1544 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1544. Misuse of a passport

       ``Any person who knowingly--
       ``(1) uses any passport issued or designed for the use of 
     another;
       ``(2) uses any passport in violation of the conditions or 
     restrictions therein contained, or in violation of the laws, 
     regulations, or rules governing the issuance and use of the 
     passport;
       ``(3) secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys, sells, or 
     distributes any passport knowing it to be forged, 
     counterfeited, altered, falsely made, procured by fraud, or 
     produced or issued without lawful authority; or
       ``(4) violates the terms and conditions of any safe conduct 
     duly obtained and issued under the authority of the United 
     States,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.''.

     SEC. 105. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.

       Section 1545 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1545. Schemes to defraud aliens

       ``(a) In General.--Any person who knowingly executes a 
     scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is 
     authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any 
     matter the offender claims or represents is authorized by or 
     arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
       ``(1) defraud any person; or
       ``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value 
     from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, 
     representations, promises,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Misrepresentation.--Any person who knowingly and 
     falsely represents that such person is an attorney or an 
     accredited representative (as that term is defined in section 
     1292.1 of title 8, Code of Federal Regulations (or any 
     successor regulation to such section)) in any matter arising 
     under Federal immigration laws shall be fined under this 
     title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.''.

     SEC. 106. IMMIGRATION AND VISA FRAUD.

       Section 1546 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1546. Immigration and visa fraud

       ``(a) In General.--Any person who knowingly--
       ``(1) uses any immigration document issued or designed for 
     the use of another;
       ``(2) forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely makes any 
     immigration document;
       ``(3) completes, mails, prepares, presents, signs, or 
     submits any immigration document knowing it to contain any 
     materially false statement or representation;
       ``(4) secures, possesses, uses, transfers, receives, buys, 
     sells, or distributes any immigration document knowing it to 
     be forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, 
     procured by fraud, or produced or issued without lawful 
     authority;
       ``(5) adopts or uses a false or fictitious name to evade or 
     to attempt to evade the immigration laws; or
       ``(6) transfers or furnishes, without lawful authority, an 
     immigration document to another person for use by a person 
     other than the person for whom the passport was issued or 
     designed,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Trafficking.--Any person who, during any period of 3 
     years or less, knowingly--
       ``(1) and without lawful authority produces, issues, or 
     transfers 10 or more immigration documents;
       ``(2) forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely makes 10 or 
     more immigration documents;
       ``(3) secures, possesses, uses, buys, sells, or distributes 
     10 or more immigration documents, knowing the immigration 
     documents to be forged, counterfeited, altered, stolen, 
     falsely made, procured by fraud, or produced or issued 
     without lawful authority; or
       ``(4) completes, mails, prepares, presents, signs, or 
     submits 10 or more immigration documents knowing the 
     documents to contain any materially false statement or 
     representation,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 
     years, or both.
       ``(c) Immigration Document Materials.--Any person who 
     knowingly and without lawful authority produces, buys, sells, 
     possesses, or uses any official material (or counterfeit of 
     any official material) used to make immigration documents, 
     including any distinctive paper, seal, hologram, image, text, 
     symbol, stamp, engraving, or plate, shall be fined under this 
     title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
       ``(d) Employment Documents.--Whoever uses--
       ``(1) an identification document, knowing (or having reason 
     to know) that the document was not issued lawfully for the 
     use of the possessor;
       ``(2) an identification document knowing (or having reason 
     to know) that the document is false; or

[[Page 905]]

       ``(3) a false attestation,

     for the purpose of satisfying a requirement of section 
     274A(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1324a(b)), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not 
     more than 5 years, or both.''.

     SEC. 107. ALTERNATIVE IMPRISONMENT MAXIMUM FOR CERTAIN 
                   OFFENSES.

       Section 1547 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``(other than an offense under section 1545)'';
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``15'' and inserting 
     ``20''; and
       (3) in paragraph (2), by striking ``20'' and inserting 
     ``25''.

     SEC. 108. ATTEMPTS, CONSPIRACIES, JURISDICTION, AND 
                   DEFINITIONS.

       Chapter 75 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding after section 1547 the following new sections:

     ``Sec. 1548. Attempts and conspiracies

       ``Any person who attempts or conspires to violate any 
     section of this chapter shall be punished in the same manner 
     as a person who completed a violation of that section.

     ``Sec. 1549. Additional jurisdiction

       ``(a) In General.--Any person who commits an offense under 
     this chapter within the special maritime and territorial 
     jurisdiction of the United States shall be punished as 
     provided under this chapter.
       ``(b) Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.--Any person who 
     commits an offense under this chapter outside the United 
     States shall be punished as provided under this chapter if--
       ``(1) the offense involves a United States passport or 
     immigration document (or any document purporting to be such a 
     document) or any matter, right, or benefit arising under or 
     authorized by Federal immigration laws;
       ``(2) the offense is in or affects foreign commerce;
       ``(3) the offense affects, jeopardizes, or poses a 
     significant risk to the lawful administration of Federal 
     immigration laws, or the national security of the United 
     States;
       ``(4) the offense is committed to facilitate an act of 
     international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) or a 
     drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 929(a)(2)) that 
     affects or would affect the national security of the United 
     States;
       ``(5) the offender is a national of the United States or an 
     alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as those 
     terms are defined in section 101(a) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a))); or
       ``(6) the offender is a stateless person whose habitual 
     residence is in the United States.

     ``Sec. 1550. Authorized law enforcement activities

       ``Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit any lawfully 
     authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence 
     activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a 
     State, or a political subdivision of a State, or an 
     intelligence agency of the United States, or any activity 
     authorized under title V of the Organized Crime Control Act 
     of 1970 (Public Law 91-452; 84 Stat. 933).

     ``Sec. 1551. Definitions

       ``As used in this chapter:
       ``(1) The term `application for a United States passport' 
     includes any document, photograph, or other piece of evidence 
     submitted in support of an application for a United States 
     passport.
       ``(2) The term `false statement or representation' includes 
     a personation or an omission.
       ``(3) The term `immigration document'--
       ``(A) means any application, petition, affidavit, 
     declaration, attestation, form, visa, identification card, 
     alien registration document, employment authorization 
     document, border crossing card, certificate, permit, order, 
     license, stamp, authorization, grant of authority, or other 
     official document, arising under or authorized by the 
     immigration laws of the United States; and
       ``(B) includes any document, photograph, or other piece of 
     evidence attached to or submitted in support of an 
     immigration document described in subparagraph (A).
       ``(4) The term `immigration laws' includes--
       ``(A) the laws described in section 101(a)(17) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17));
       ``(B) the laws relating to the issuance and use of 
     passports; and
       ``(C) the regulations prescribed under the authority of any 
     law described in subparagraph (A) or (B).
       ``(5) A person does not exercise `lawful authority' if the 
     person abuses or improperly exercises lawful authority the 
     person otherwise holds.
       ``(6) The term `passport' means--
       ``(A) a travel document attesting to the identity and 
     nationality of the bearer that is issued under the authority 
     of the Secretary of State, a foreign government, or an 
     international organization; or
       ``(B) any instrument purporting to be a document described 
     in subparagraph (A).
       ``(7) The term `produce' means to make, prepare, assemble, 
     issue, print, authenticate, or alter.
       ``(8) The term `to present' means to offer or submit for 
     official processing, examination, or adjudication. Any such 
     presentation continues until the official processing, 
     examination, or adjudication is complete.
       ``(9) The `use' of a passport or an immigration document 
     referred to in section 1541(a), 1543(b), 1544, 1546(a), and 
     1546(b) of this chapter includes--
       ``(A) any officially authorized use;
       ``(B) use to travel;
       ``(C) use to demonstrate identity, residence, nationality, 
     citizenship, or immigration status;
       ``(D) use to seek or maintain employment; or
       ``(E) use in any matter within the jurisdiction of the 
     Federal government or of a State government.''.

     SEC. 109. CLERICAL AMENDMENT.

       The table of sections for chapter 75 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``Sec
``1541. Trafficking in passports.
``1542. False statement in an application for a passport.
``1543. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport.
``1544. Misuse of a passport.
``1545. Schemes to defraud aliens.
``1546. Immigration and visa fraud.
``1547. Alternative imprisonment maximum for certain offenses.
``1548. Attempts and conspiracies.
``1549. Additional jurisdiction.
``1550. Authorized law enforcement activities.
``1550. Definitions.''.

                        TITLE II--OTHER REFORMS

     SEC. 201. DIRECTIVE TO THE UNITED STATES SENTENCING 
                   COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--Pursuant to the authority under section 
     994 of title 28, United States Code, the United States 
     Sentencing Commission shall promulgate or amend the 
     sentencing guidelines, policy statements, and official 
     commentaries related to passport fraud offenses, including 
     the offenses described in chapter 75 of title 18, United 
     States Code, as amended by section 2, to reflect the serious 
     nature of such offenses.
       (b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the United States Sentencing 
     Commission shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives a report on the implementation of this 
     section.

     SEC. 202. RELEASE AND DETENTION PRIOR TO DISPOSITION.

       (a) Detention.--Section 3142(e) of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) Detention.--(1) If, after a hearing pursuant to the 
     provisions of subsection (f) of this section, the judicial 
     officer finds that no condition or combination of conditions 
     will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as 
     required and the safety of any other person and the 
     community, such judicial officer shall order the detention of 
     the person before trial.
       ``(2) In a case described in subsection (f)(1) of this 
     section, a rebuttable presumption arises that no condition or 
     combination of conditions will reasonably assure the safety 
     of any other person and the community if such judicial 
     officer finds that--
       ``(A) the person has been convicted of a Federal offense 
     that is described in subsection (f)(1) of this section, or of 
     a State or local offense that would have been an offense 
     described in subsection (f)(1) of this section if a 
     circumstance giving rise to Federal jurisdiction had existed;
       ``(B) the offense described in subparagraph (A) of this 
     paragraph was committed while the person was on release 
     pending trial for a Federal, State, or local offense; and
       ``(C) a period of not more than five years has elapsed 
     since the date of conviction, or the release of the person 
     from imprisonment, for the offense described in subparagraph 
     (A) of this paragraph, whichever is later.
       ``(3) Subject to rebuttal by the person, it shall be 
     presumed that no condition or combination of conditions will 
     reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required 
     and the safety of the community if the judicial officer finds 
     that there is probable cause to believe that the person 
     committed an offense for which a maximum term of imprisonment 
     of ten years or more is prescribed in the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Controlled 
     Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.), or 
     chapter 705 of title 46, an offense under section 924(c), 
     956(a), or 2332b of this title, or an offense listed in 
     section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of this title for which a maximum term 
     of imprisonment of 10 years or more is prescribed, or an 
     offense involving a minor victim under section 1201, 1591, 
     2241, 2242, 2244(a)(1), 2245, 2251, 2251A, 2252(a)(1), 
     2252(a)(2), 2252(a)(3), 2252A(a)(1), 2252A(a)(2), 
     2252A(a)(3), 2252A(a)(4), 2260, 2421, 2422, 2423, or 2425 of 
     this title.
       ``(4) Subject to rebuttal by the person, it shall be 
     presumed that no condition or combination of conditions will 
     reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required if 
     the judicial officer finds that there is probable cause to 
     believe that the person--
       ``(A) is an alien; and
       ``(B)(i) has no lawful immigration status in the United 
     States;
       ``(ii) is the subject of a final order of removal; or

[[Page 906]]

       ``(iii) has committed a felony offense under chapter 75 of 
     this title.''.
       (b) Factors to Be Considered.--Section 3142(g)(3) of title 
     18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) the person's immigration status; and''.

     SEC. 203. PROTECTION FOR LEGITIMATE REFUGEES AND ASYLUM 
                   SEEKERS.

       (a) Protection for Legitimate Refugees and Asylum 
     Seekers.--The Attorney General, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, shall develop binding 
     prosecution guidelines for Federal prosecutors to ensure that 
     any prosecution of an alien seeking entry into the United 
     States by fraud is consistent with the United States treaty 
     obligations under Article 31(1) of the Convention Relating to 
     the Status of Refugees, done at Geneva July 28, 1951 (as made 
     applicable by the Protocol Relating to the Status of 
     Refugees, done at New York January 31, 1967 (19 UST 6223)).
       (b) No Private Right of Action.--The guidelines required by 
     subsection (a), and any internal office procedures adopted 
     pursuant thereto, are intended solely for the guidance of 
     attorneys for the United States. This section, such 
     guidelines, and the process for determining such guidelines 
     are not intended to, do not, and may not be relied upon to 
     create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, 
     enforceable at law by any party in any administrative, civil, 
     or criminal matter

     SEC. 204. DIPLOMATIC SECURITY SERVICE.

       Section 37(a)(1) of the State Department Basic Authorities 
     Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2709(a)(1)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(1) conduct investigations concerning--
       ``(A) illegal passport or visa issuance or use;
       ``(B) identity theft or document fraud affecting or 
     relating to the programs, functions, and authorities of the 
     Department of State;
       ``(C) violations of chapter 77 of title 18, United States 
     Code; and
       ``(D) Federal offenses committed within the special 
     maritime and territorial jurisdiction defined in paragraph 
     (9) of section 7 of title 18, United States Code;''.

     SEC. 205. UNIFORM STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR CERTAIN 
                   IMMIGRATION, PASSPORT, AND NATURALIZATION 
                   OFFENSES.

       (a) In General.--Section 3291 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 3291. Immigration, passport, and naturalization 
       offenses

       ``No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for a 
     violation of any section of chapters 69 (relating to 
     nationality and citizenship offenses) or 75 (relating to 
     passport and visa offenses) of this title, or for an attempt 
     or conspiracy to violate any such section, unless the 
     indictment is returned or the information is filed within ten 
     years after the commission of the offense.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     213 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     the item relating to section 3291 and inserting the 
     following:

``3291. Immigration, passport, and naturalization offenses''.

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague Senator 
Feinstein for her hard work on document security issues. She currently 
serves as the Chair of the Judiciary Committee's Terrorism 
Subcommittee, Senator Kyl is Ranking Member, and I am looking forward 
to working with her on the document security that issues I am sure our 
subcommittee will address this Congress.
  This year will mark the 3rd year Senator Feinstein and I have worked 
together on legislation aimed at making it easier to prosecute people 
trying to enter the U.S. with fraudulent documents.
  One of the most dangerous document security issues we face is how to 
keep passports and visas out of the hands of the people we don't want 
to have them.
  As a 2004 U.S. News and World Report article rightly stated, ``When 
it comes to terrorists' most valuable weapons, passports and visas 
probably rank higher than bullets and bombs.'' A 2004 study done by the 
Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General titled ``A 
Review of the Use of Stolen Passports From Visa Waiver Countries to 
Enter the United States,'' found that ``[there are] over 10 million 
lost or stolen passports that might be in circulation.'' As background 
for the report, the Forensics Documents Laboratory informed the Office 
of the Inspector General that ``criminals consider a passport'' from a 
Visa Waiver Country ``a very valuable commodity.''
  To keep out terrorists and others we do not want to allow into the 
United States, we must be able to identify and effectively prosecute 
people who lie or give us fraudulent information to obtain a U.S. visa 
or a passport.
  Additionally, we must be able to identify and effectively prosecute 
people trying to enter the U.S. with a passport or visa that belongs to 
someone else.
  Perhaps most importantly, we must effectively prosecute those 
possessing multiple passports and visas they intend to distribute to 
others. We must be able to take these ``career'' document traffickers, 
those caught with more than 10 fraudulent passports or visas, off the 
streets.
  Under current law, violators are not being prosecuted effectively 
because there is no statute that specifically makes trafficking in 
multiple (10 or more) documents its own crime. This bill will add that 
new crime--punishable by 20 years in jail--to the passport and visa 
fraud sections of the criminal code.
  In addition to creating a new crime to penalize trafficking in 10 or 
more fraudulent immigration documents, 20 year maximum sentence, Title 
I of the bill simplifies the language of several of the current 
passport fraud provisions of the criminal code and changes the maximum 
penalties for these offenses from 10 years for the first offense and 15 
years for subsequent offenses, to simply 15 years for each offense.
  The bill also includes a new protection for immigrants. Anyone who 
engages in a scheme to defraud them in connection with matters under 
Federal immigration law, or who pretends to be an immigration lawyer, 
will be charged under a new crime that carries a maximum penalty of 15 
years. Although this provision is not strictly related to passport 
fraud, it will protect immigrants from sham attorneys and legal 
``experts'' who cheat them out of their money by pretending to offer 
them immigration benefits or legitimate documents.
  Many of the bill's provisions simply clean up sections of the 
criminal code. For example--one section modifies the alternative 
sentencing penalties to make sure the penalties for severe passport 
fraud offenses (such as those used to facilitate a drug trafficking 
crime or an act of international terrorism) are consistent throughout 
the code.
  Other provisions codify common law principles needed for effective 
prosecution of document fraud offenses. For example--one section makes 
needed clarifications on venue. Currently, false statements or 
documents are often included in the application which is mailed from 
one location but processed in another location. This section makes 
clear that the offense is perpetrated both at the location of the 
mailing and at the location of the adjudication. If the application 
containing false statements is prepared overseas, this section 
clarifies that the offense is still punishable in the United States.
  In March of 2004, Mark Zuckerman, Assistant U.S. Attorney for New 
Hampshire, testified before the United States Sentencing Commission. 
New Hampshire's National Passport Center processed 2 million of the 7 
million passports issued in 2003. The National Passport Center also 
receives nearly all of the applications for passport renewals filed 
with the State Department. New Hampshire conducted a passport fraud 
initiative in its U.S. Attorney's Office as part of its anti-terrorism 
effort. Zuckerman's testimony provides some insight into the problems 
that arose during the initiative.
  Though the passport applications were processed in New Hampshire, 
cases of passport fraud resulting from those applications were not 
being handled in New Hampshire. Typically, they were sent back to the 
district from which they were mailed. Once returned, they were often 
declined for prosecution by their local U.S. Attorney's office.
  One of the reasons frequently given by the regional U.S. Attorney's 
Offices for declining passport fraud cases was: ``The sentencing 
guidelines do not treat passport fraud as a serious offense for which a 
period of incarceration is likely.''

[[Page 907]]

  I would reiterate what Mr. Zuckerman so astutely pointed out in his 
testimony. Under the current Criminal Code, the most common forms of 
passport fraud--unless they constitute terrorism or drug trafficking--
are just class C felonies. When the defendant has no criminal history, 
the court is simply required to incarcerate the defendant for 0-6 
months. This is the lowest and least consequential sentencing range 
that can be assigned to any felony under the U.S. Code. (page 5 of 
Zuckerman's testimony)
  The 9/11 Commission also recognized the lack of routine prosecutions 
for passport fraud offenses. Page 386 of their report noted:

       Fraudulent travel documents, for instance, are usually 
     returned to travelers who are denied entry without further 
     examination for terrorist trademarks, investigation into 
     their source, or legal process.

  Importantly, the bill we are introducing today directs the Sentencing 
Commission to reevaluate the current low sentencing guidelines for 
passport and visa fraud offenses to reflect the potential seriousness 
of these crimes and the changes made by our bill.
  Additionally, we will require the Sentencing Commission to report 
back to the Congress on the rationale behind their decision to change 
(or not change) the sentencing guidelines as a result of this 
direction.
  Majority Leader Harry Reid has repeatedly stated that one of the 
items at the top of the Democratic agenda early this Congress is the 
implementation of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. In 
addition to their comments on the lack of prosecutions, the 9/11 
Commission had a lot more say about the use of fraudulent and altered 
passports and visas in the Commission of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
  ``[W]e endeavor to dispel the myth that their [the hijackers'] entry 
into the United States was `clean and legal'. It was not. . . . two 
[hijackers] carried passports manipulated in a fraudulent manner. It is 
likely that several more hijackers carried passports with similar 
fraudulent manipulation. Two hijackers lied on their visa 
applications'' Preface, 9/11 Commission staff report.
  ``To avoid detection of their activities and objectives while 
engaging in travel that necessitates using a passport, terrorists 
devote extensive resources to acquiring and manipulating passports, 
entry and exits stamps, and visas. The al Qaeda terrorist organization 
was no exception. High-level members of Al Qaeda were expert document 
forgers . . .'' Page 1. 9/11 Commission staff report.
  ``Travel history, however, is still recorded in passports with entry-
exit stamps called cachets, which al Qaeda has trained its operatives 
to forge and use to conceal their terrorist activities''. Page 403, 9/
11 Commission report.
  ``[C]ertain al Qaeda members were charged with organizing passport 
collection schemes to keep the pipelines of fraudulent documents 
flowing.'' Page 186., ibid
  ``For terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons. They 
must travel clandestinely to meet, train, plan, case targets, and gain 
access to attack . . . In their travels, terrorists use evasive 
measures, such as altered and counterfeit passports and visas . . .'' 
Page 384. ibid.
  I hope that Senator Reid plans to include the Feinstein/Sessions 
Passport and Visa Fraud Bill in his 9/11 Commission Recommendations 
Implementation Package.

                          ____________________